From: Andrea Claudi <aclaudi@redhat.com>
To: Abhijeet Rastogi <abhijeet.1989@gmail.com>
Cc: Julian Anastasov <ja@ssi.bg>, Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>,
Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>,
Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@netfilter.org>,
Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, lvs-devel@vger.kernel.org,
netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, coreteam@netfilter.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipvs: change ip_vs_conn_tab_bits range to [8,31]
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2023 13:58:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZD6F9l2yE0i42YE5@renaissance-vector> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACXxYfxLU0jWmq0W7YxX=44XFCGvgMX2HwTFUUHCUMjO28g5BA@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 06:58:06PM -0700, Abhijeet Rastogi wrote:
> Hi Simon, Andrea and Julian,
>
> I really appreciate you taking the time to respond to my patch. Some follow up
> questions that I'll appreciate a response for.
>
> @Simon Horman
> >In any case, I think this patch is an improvement on the current situation.
>
> +1 to this. I wanted to add that, we're not changing the defaults
> here, the default still stays at 2^12. If a kernel user changes the
> default, they probably already know what the limitations are, so I
> personally don't think it is a big concern.
>
> @Andrea Claudi
> >for the record, RHEL ships with CONFIG_IP_VS_TAB_BITS set to 12 as
> default.
>
> Sorry, I should have been clearer. RHEL ships with the same default,
> yes, but it doesn't have the range check, at least, on the version I'm
> using right now (3.10.0-1160.62.1.el7.x86_64).
>
> On this version, I'm able to load with bit size 30, 31 gives me error
> regarding allocating memory (64GB host) and anything beyond 31 is
> mysteriously switched to a lower number. The following dmesg on my
> host confirms that the bitsize 30 worked, which is not possible
> without a patch on the current kernel version.
>
> "[Fri Apr 14 01:14:51 2023] IPVS: Connection hash table configured (size=1073741
> 824, memory=16777216Kbytes)"
I see. This makes sense to me as RHEL 7 does not include the range
check, while RHEL 8 and RHEL 9 both includes it.
The reason why any number beyond 31 results in a lower number is to be
searched in gcc implementation. IIRC shifting an int by more than 31 or
less than 0 results in an undefined behaviour, according to the C
standard.
>
> @Julian Anastasov,
> >This is not a limit of number of connections. I prefer
> not to allow value above 24 without adding checks for the
> available memory,
>
> Interesting that you brought up that number 24, that is exactly what
> we use in production today. One IPVS node is able to handle spikes of
> 10M active connections without issues. This patch idea originated as
> my company is migrating from the ancient RHEL version to a somewhat
> newer CentOS (5.* kernel) and noticed that we were unable to load the
> ip_vs kernel module with anything greater than 20 bits. Another
> motivation for kernel upgrade is utilizing maglev to reduce table size
> but that's out of context in this discussion.
>
> My request is, can we increase the range from 20 to something larger?
> If 31 seems a bit excessive, maybe, we can settle for something like
> [8,30] or even lower. With conn_tab_bits=30, it allocates 16GB at
> initialization time, it is not entirely absurd by today's standards.
>
> I can revise my patch to a lower range as you guys see fit.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Abhijeet (https://abhi.host)
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-18 12:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-12 20:49 [PATCH] ipvs: change ip_vs_conn_tab_bits range to [8,31] Abhijeet Rastogi via B4 Relay
2023-04-13 8:09 ` Simon Horman
2023-04-13 10:35 ` Andrea Claudi
2023-04-13 11:49 ` Julian Anastasov
2023-04-14 1:58 ` Abhijeet Rastogi
2023-04-14 13:59 ` Julian Anastasov
2023-05-14 20:40 ` Abhijeet Rastogi
2023-04-18 11:58 ` Andrea Claudi [this message]
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=ZD6F9l2yE0i42YE5@renaissance-vector \
--to=aclaudi@redhat.com \
--cc=abhijeet.1989@gmail.com \
--cc=coreteam@netfilter.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=horms@verge.net.au \
--cc=ja@ssi.bg \
--cc=kadlec@netfilter.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lvs-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=pablo@netfilter.org \
/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).