From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
To: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
Subject: Re: ARP table question
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:50:50 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49221F7A.8030706@candelatech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49221CE1.9000807@hp.com>
Rick Jones wrote:
> Ben Greear wrote:
>> Rick Jones wrote:
>>
>>>> +static unsigned long neigh_rand_retry(struct neighbour* neigh) {
>>>> + if (neigh->parms->retrans_rand_backoff) {
>>>> + return net_random() % neigh->parms->retrans_rand_backoff;
>>>> + }
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> /* Called when a timer expires for a neighbour entry. */
>>>
>>>
>>> I thought that mod was something we tried to avoid? Could you
>>> instead use something that isn't random but perhaps varies among all
>>> the requests? Say some of the low-order bits of the IP being resolved?
>>
>>
>> This is only called when we are going to retransmit an ARP, which
>> shouldn't
>> be in any sort of hot path, so I figured MOD was fine.
>>
>> The net_random is a very cheap method (last I checked), as well.
>>
>> So, I think that part is OK as it is, but I'm open to
>> persuasion :)
>
> Perhaps I'm confused, or simply channeling Emily Litella again, but if
> you only do this on the 1st through Nth retransmissions (ie after the
> first retransmission timer has popped) don't you still have a thundering
> herd problem on the first transmission and the first retransmission of
> ARP requests?
You'd certainly have it on the first transmission, but I think from there on
the randomness should kick in. This is a pretty rare case, and I'd rather
not slow down the initial ARP. If we *are* in the overload situation, then
the network can just purge/drop/whatever the initial flood and then the
retransmits should start doing their random thing. On my system, it still
takes maybe 30 seconds for all the ARPs to resolve since a good deal of
the requests and/or responses are being lost.
After some more testing, I can still get it into a bad
state if I have a retrans timer of 1 sec and a randomness of 5 secs
and manage to cause all 1000 arp entries to go stale at once (by
yanking a cable, for instance).
It seems I have to bump up the base timer to 3-5 seconds (I'm
leaving the random backoff at 5 secs as well).
Thanks,
Ben
--
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-18 1:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <491B1600.4080505@candelatech.com>
[not found] ` <491B1841.9050404@candelatech.com>
2008-11-12 19:43 ` ARP table question Ben Greear
2008-11-12 22:10 ` Ben Greear
2008-11-17 3:16 ` David Miller
2008-11-17 18:17 ` Ben Greear
2008-11-18 0:33 ` Ben Greear
2008-11-18 0:51 ` Rick Jones
2008-11-18 1:23 ` Ben Greear
2008-11-18 1:39 ` Rick Jones
2008-11-18 1:50 ` Ben Greear [this message]
2008-11-20 8:33 ` David Miller
2008-11-20 17:23 ` Ben Greear
2008-11-20 17:33 ` Benjamin LaHaise
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=49221F7A.8030706@candelatech.com \
--to=greearb@candelatech.com \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rick.jones2@hp.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).