From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Baron Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/6] net: fix sk_mem_reclaim_partial() Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2015 16:53:51 -0400 Message-ID: <55BFD4DF.30703@gmail.com> References: <1431718770-3815-1-git-send-email-edumazet@google.com> <1431718770-3815-2-git-send-email-edumazet@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev , Jason Baron , Neal Cardwell , Yuchung Cheng , Eric Dumazet To: Eric Dumazet , "David S. Miller" Return-path: Received: from mail-qk0-f182.google.com ([209.85.220.182]:35549 "EHLO mail-qk0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932266AbbHCUxy (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Aug 2015 16:53:54 -0400 Received: by qkbm65 with SMTP id m65so55410422qkb.2 for ; Mon, 03 Aug 2015 13:53:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1431718770-3815-2-git-send-email-edumazet@google.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 05/15/2015 03:39 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > sk_mem_reclaim_partial() goal is to ensure each socket has > one SK_MEM_QUANTUM forward allocation. This is needed both for > performance and better handling of memory pressure situations in > follow up patches. > > SK_MEM_QUANTUM is currently a page, but might be reduced to 4096 bytes > as some arches have 64KB pages. > > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet > --- > include/net/sock.h | 6 +++--- > net/core/sock.c | 9 +++++---- > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/net/sock.h b/include/net/sock.h > index d882f4c8e438..4581a60636f8 100644 > --- a/include/net/sock.h > +++ b/include/net/sock.h > @@ -1368,7 +1368,7 @@ static inline struct inode *SOCK_INODE(struct socket *socket) > * Functions for memory accounting > */ > int __sk_mem_schedule(struct sock *sk, int size, int kind); > -void __sk_mem_reclaim(struct sock *sk); > +void __sk_mem_reclaim(struct sock *sk, int amount); > > #define SK_MEM_QUANTUM ((int)PAGE_SIZE) > #define SK_MEM_QUANTUM_SHIFT ilog2(SK_MEM_QUANTUM) > @@ -1409,7 +1409,7 @@ static inline void sk_mem_reclaim(struct sock *sk) > if (!sk_has_account(sk)) > return; > if (sk->sk_forward_alloc >= SK_MEM_QUANTUM) > - __sk_mem_reclaim(sk); > + __sk_mem_reclaim(sk, sk->sk_forward_alloc); > } > > static inline void sk_mem_reclaim_partial(struct sock *sk) > @@ -1417,7 +1417,7 @@ static inline void sk_mem_reclaim_partial(struct sock *sk) > if (!sk_has_account(sk)) > return; > if (sk->sk_forward_alloc > SK_MEM_QUANTUM) > - __sk_mem_reclaim(sk); > + __sk_mem_reclaim(sk, sk->sk_forward_alloc - 1); > } > Hi, Was just looking at this again - this doesn't ensure the SK_MEM_QUANTUM minimum as the comment suggests- should it be: _sk_mem_reclaim(sk, sk->sk_forward_alloc - SK_MEM_QUANTUM); ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Or are you just trying to make sure its not 0? Thanks, -Jason