From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
Cc: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] netfilter: finer grained nf_conn locking
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:05:32 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090330130532.1e433313@nehalam> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49D1241B.6020504@cosmosbay.com>
On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 21:57:15 +0200
Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com> wrote:
> Stephen Hemminger a écrit :
> > On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 17:55:38 +0100
> > Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Eric Dumazet a écrit :
> >>> Patrick McHardy a écrit :
> >>>> Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> @@ -50,6 +50,7 @@ struct ip_ct_tcp_state {
> >>>>>
> >>>>> struct ip_ct_tcp
> >>>>> {
> >>>>> + spinlock_t lock;
> >>>>> struct ip_ct_tcp_state seen[2]; /* connection parameters per
> >>>>> direction */
> >>>>> u_int8_t state; /* state of the connection (enum
> >>>>> tcp_conntrack) */
> >>>>> /* For detecting stale connections */
> >>>> Eric already posted a patch to use an array of locks, which is
> >>>> a better approach IMO since it keeps the size of the conntrack
> >>>> entries down.
> >>> Yes, we probably can use an array for short lived lock sections.
> >
> > I am not a fan of the array of locks. Sizing it is awkward and
> > it is vulnerable to hash collisions. Let's see if there is another
> > better way.
>
> On normal machines, (no debugging spinlocks), patch uses an embedded
> spinlock. We probably can use this even on 32bit kernels, considering
> previous patch removed the rcu_head (8 bytes on 32bit arches) from
> nf_conn :)
>
> if LOCKDEP is on, size of a spinlock is 64 bytes on x86_64.
> Adding a spinlock on each nf_conn would be too expensive. In this
> case, an array of spinlock is a good compromise, as done in
> IP route cache, tcp ehash, ...
>
> I agree sizing of this hash table is not pretty, and should be
> a generic kernel service (I wanted such service for futexes for example)
>
IMO having different locking based on lockdep and architecture is an invitation
to future obscure problems. Perhaps some other locking method or shrinking
ct entry would be better.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-30 20:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 83+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-18 5:19 [RFT 0/4] Netfilter/iptables performance improvements Stephen Hemminger
2009-02-18 5:19 ` [RFT 1/4] iptables: lock free counters Stephen Hemminger
2009-02-18 10:02 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-19 19:47 ` [PATCH] " Stephen Hemminger
2009-02-19 23:46 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-19 23:56 ` Rick Jones
2009-02-20 1:03 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-02-20 1:18 ` Rick Jones
2009-02-20 9:42 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-20 22:57 ` Rick Jones
2009-02-21 0:35 ` Rick Jones
2009-02-20 9:37 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-20 18:10 ` [PATCH] iptables: xt_hashlimit fix Eric Dumazet
2009-02-20 18:33 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-02-28 1:54 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-02-28 6:56 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-28 8:22 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-02-24 14:31 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-27 14:02 ` [PATCH] iptables: lock free counters Eric Dumazet
2009-02-27 16:08 ` [PATCH] rcu: increment quiescent state counter in ksoftirqd() Eric Dumazet
2009-02-27 16:34 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-03-02 10:55 ` [PATCH] iptables: lock free counters Patrick McHardy
2009-03-02 17:47 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-02 21:56 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-03-02 22:02 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-03-02 22:07 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-03-02 22:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-03-02 22:27 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-18 5:19 ` [RFT 2/4] Add mod_timer_noact Stephen Hemminger
2009-02-18 9:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-18 9:30 ` David Miller
2009-02-18 11:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-18 11:39 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-02-18 12:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-18 12:33 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 21:39 ` David Miller
2009-02-18 21:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-18 22:04 ` David Miller
2009-02-18 22:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-02-18 22:47 ` David Miller
2009-02-18 22:56 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-02-18 10:07 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 12:05 ` [patch] timers: add mod_timer_pending() Ingo Molnar
2009-02-18 12:33 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 12:50 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-18 12:54 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 13:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-18 17:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-02-18 18:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-18 18:58 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-02-18 19:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-18 10:29 ` [RFT 2/4] Add mod_timer_noact Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 5:19 ` [RFT 3/4] Use mod_timer_noact to remove nf_conntrack_lock Stephen Hemminger
2009-02-18 9:54 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 11:05 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-02-18 11:08 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 14:01 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-18 14:04 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 14:22 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-18 14:27 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 5:19 ` [RFT 4/4] netfilter: Get rid of central rwlock in tcp conntracking Stephen Hemminger
2009-02-18 9:56 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 14:17 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-19 22:03 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-03-28 16:55 ` [PATCH] netfilter: finer grained nf_conn locking Eric Dumazet
2009-03-29 0:48 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-03-30 19:57 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-30 20:05 ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2009-04-06 12:07 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-04-06 12:32 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-04-06 17:25 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-03-30 18:57 ` Rick Jones
2009-03-30 19:20 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-30 19:38 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-03-30 19:54 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-30 20:34 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-03-30 20:41 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-30 21:25 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-03-30 22:44 ` Rick Jones
2009-02-18 21:55 ` [RFT 4/4] netfilter: Get rid of central rwlock in tcp conntracking David Miller
2009-02-18 23:23 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 23:35 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-02-18 8:30 ` [RFT 0/4] Netfilter/iptables performance improvements Eric Dumazet
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=20090330130532.1e433313@nehalam \
--to=shemminger@vyatta.com \
--cc=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@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).