From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
To: johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru
Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@cyberus.ca>,
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
James Morris <jmorris@redhat.com>,
Guillaume Thouvenin <guillaume.thouvenin@bull.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>, Jay Lan <jlan@engr.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [1/1] connector/CBUS: new messaging subsystem. Revision number next.
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 15:02:01 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d120d500050426130250ff9632@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050426232812.0c7bb3a4@zanzibar.2ka.mipt.ru>
On 4/26/05, Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 14:06:36 -0500
> Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 4/26/05, Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 13:42:10 -0500
> > > Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Yes, that woudl work, although I would urge you to implement a message
> > > > queue for callbacks (probably limit it to 1000 messages or so) to
> > > > allow bursting.
> > >
> > > It already exist, btw, but not exactly in that way -
> > > we have skb queue, which can not be filled from userspace
> > > if pressure is so strong so work queue can not be scheduled.
> > > It is of course different and is influenced by other things
> > > but it handles bursts quite well - it was tested on both
> > > SMP and UP machines with continuous flows of forks with
> > > shape addon of new running tasks [both fith fork bomb and not],
> > > so I think it can be called real bursty test.
> > >
> >
> > Ok, hear me out and tell me where I am wrong:
> >
> > By default a socket can receive at least 128 skbs with 258-byte
> > payload, correct? That means that user of cn_netlink_send, if started
> > "fresh", 128 average - size connector messages. If sender does not
> > want to wait for anything (unlike your fork tests that do schedule)
> > that means that 127 of those 128 messages will be dropped, although
> > netlink would deliver them in time just fine.
> >
> > What am I missing?
>
> Concider netlink_broadcast - it delivers skb to the kernel
> listener directly to the input callback - no queueing actually,
Right, no queueing for in-kernel...
But then we have the following: netlink will drop messages sent to
in-kernel socket ony if it can not copy skb - which is i'd say a very
rare scenario. Connector, on the other hand, is guaranteed to drop all
but the very first message sent between 2 schedules. That makes
connector several orders of magnitude less reliable than bare netlink
protocol. And you don't see it with your fork tests because you do
schedule when you fork.
--
Dmitry
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-04-26 20:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-04-11 12:59 [1/1] connector/CBUS: new messaging subsystem. Revision number next Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-04-11 13:32 ` Thomas Graf
2005-04-11 14:49 ` [2/1] " Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-04-26 15:57 ` [1/1] " Dmitry Torokhov
2005-04-26 16:24 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-04-26 16:30 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-04-26 17:34 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2005-04-26 18:07 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-04-26 18:20 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2005-04-26 18:31 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-04-26 18:42 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2005-04-26 18:48 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-04-26 19:06 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2005-04-26 19:28 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-04-26 20:02 ` Dmitry Torokhov [this message]
2005-04-27 4:06 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-04-27 5:16 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2005-04-27 5:32 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-04-27 5:46 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2005-04-27 6:08 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-04-26 17:31 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2005-04-26 18:03 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-04-26 18:10 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-04-26 18:13 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-04-26 18:25 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2005-04-26 18:35 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-05-10 6:18 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2005-05-10 10:04 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-05-10 14:56 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2005-05-10 15:41 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-05-10 17:50 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2005-05-10 18:24 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-05-11 5:46 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2005-05-11 6:48 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-05-11 14:09 ` Alan Cox
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=d120d500050426130250ff9632@mail.gmail.com \
--to=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=dtor_core@ameritech.net \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=guillaume.thouvenin@bull.net \
--cc=hadi@cyberus.ca \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=jlan@engr.sgi.com \
--cc=jmorris@redhat.com \
--cc=johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru \
--cc=kay.sievers@vrfy.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=tgraf@suug.ch \
/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).