From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
To: Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, netfilter@vger.kernel.org,
coreteam@netfilter.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Linux Containers <containers@lists.osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix repeatable Oops on container destroy with conntrack
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:33:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110912183357.GC3641@1984> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E0902A9541FD5D118EA02B31@Ximines.local>
Hi Alex,
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 11:32:18AM +0100, Alex Bligh wrote:
> I /think/ it is the correct fix, in that it certainly fixes the oops,
> and it's relatively low overhead. I ran the torture test for 24 hours
> without a problem.
>
> My only concern is that eventually my torture test died as the
> machine (512MB VM) had run out of memory - this was after about 30
> hours. Save for having no free memory, the box is happy.
> It looks like there is something (possibly something
> entirely different) leaking memory. It does not appear to be
> conntrack. Whatever, a slow memory leak causing death on a tiny
> VM over 5,000 iterations is better than an oops after 5. Memory
> stats below. I will leave the vm up in case anyone wants other
> stats.
Seems like a different issue.
> On the suggestion to move the check for ->nfnl into
> nfnetlink_has_listeners(), the problem with that is that
> if item->report is non-NULL, nfnetlink_has_listeners()
> will not be called, and the early return will not be made.
> This will merely delay the oops until elsewhere (nfnetlink_send
> for example). The check is currently as follows:
>
> if (!item->report && !nfnetlink_has_listeners(net, group))
> return 0;
>
> I am a very long way from being a netlink expert, but I am not
> entirely sure what the point of progressing further is if there
> are no listeners if item->report is non-null. Certainly there is
> no point in progressing if net->nfnl NULL (as this will oops
> before item->report is meaningfully used - it's just passed
> as a parametner to nfnetlink_send which will crash). It's
> almost as if that test should be || not &&.
>
> Perhaps we should check net->nfnl in both places.
>
> I think there might be similar issues with ctnetlink_expect_event.
Yes, this is what Alexey was pointing out in the previous email and
why he suggested to move it to nfnetlink_has_listeners (to cover the
expectation case).
But you're right, we cannot move it to nfnetlink_has_listeners because
of the item->report case. Please, include the expectation part and
resend the patch.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-12 18:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-09-10 18:48 [PATCH] Fix repeatable Oops on container destroy with conntrack Alex Bligh
2011-09-12 7:25 ` Alexey Dobriyan
2011-09-12 9:37 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2011-09-12 10:32 ` Alex Bligh
2011-09-12 18:33 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso [this message]
2011-09-12 19:06 ` Alex Bligh
2011-09-13 20:44 ` Alex Bligh
2011-09-14 1:35 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2011-09-14 8:01 ` Alex Bligh
2011-09-28 21:08 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2011-09-30 15:54 ` Alex Bligh
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=20110912183357.GC3641@1984 \
--to=pablo@netfilter.org \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=alex@alex.org.uk \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=containers@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=coreteam@netfilter.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter@vger.kernel.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).