Re: [PATCH] xfrm: implement basic garbage collection for bundles

["Timo Teräs" <timo.teras@iki.fi>]

Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 02:15:41PM +0200, Timo Teras wrote:
>> The dst core calls garbage collection only from dst_alloc when
>> the dst entry threshold is exceeded. Xfrm core currently checks
>> bundles only on NETDEV_DOWN event.
>>
>> Previously this has not been a big problem since xfrm gc threshold
>> was small, and they were generated all the time due to another bug.
>>
>> Since after a33bc5c15154c835aae26f16e6a3a7d9ad4acb45
>> ("xfrm: select sane defaults for xfrm[4|6] gc_thresh") we can have
>> large gc threshold sizes (>200000 on machines with normal amount
>> of memory) the garbage collection does not get triggered under
>> normal circumstances. This can result in enormous amount of stale
>> bundles. Further more, each of these stale bundles keep a reference
>> to ipv4/ipv6 rtable entries which are already gargage collected and
>> put to dst core "destroy free'd dst's" list. Now this list can grow
>> to be very large, and the dst core periodic job can bring even a fast
>> machine to it's knees.
> 
> So why do we need this larger threshold in the first place? Neil?

Actually it looks like that on ipv6 side the gc_thresh is something
more normal. On ipv4 side it's insanely big. The 1/2 ratio is not
what ipv4 rtable uses for it's own gc_thresh. Looks like it's using
1/16 ratio which yields much better value.

But even if we have the gc_thresh back to 1024 or similar size,
it is still a good thing to do some basic gc on xfrm bundles so
that the underlaying rtable dst's can be freed before they end up
in the dst core list.

- Timo