From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
To: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
Cc: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: update element timeout support [was Re: [PATCH nf 1/2] netfilter: nft_set_rbtree: move sync GC from insert path to set->ops->commit]
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2023 15:58:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231002135838.GB30843@breakpoint.cc> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZRq6oP2/hns1qoaq@calendula>
Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 01, 2023 at 11:08:16PM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > Element E1, times out in 1 hour
> > Element E2, times out in 1 second
> > Element E3, timed out (1 second ago, 3 minutes ago, doesn't matter).
> >
> > Userspace batch to kernel:
> > Update Element E1 to time out in 2 hours.
> > Update Element E2 to time out in 1 hour.
> > Update Element E3 to time out in 1 hour.
> >
> > What is the expected outcome of this request?
> >
> > Ignore E3 being reaped already and refresh the timeout (resurrection?)
>
> No resurrection, the element might have counters, it already expired.
OK.
> > Ignore E3 being reaped already and ignore the request?
> > Fail the transaction as E3 timed out already ("does not exist")?
>
> Add a new E3. If NLM_F_EXCL is specified, then fail with "does not exist"
OK.
> > Now, what about E2? If transaction is large, it could become
> > like E3 *during the transaction* unless we introduce some freezing
> > mechanism. Whats the expected outcome?
> >
> > Whats the expected outcome if there is some other, unrelated
> > failure? I assume we have to roll back all the timeout updates, right?
>
> We annotate the new timeout in transaction object, then refresh the
> timeout update in the commit phase.
OK, so as per "E3-example", you're saying that if E2 expires during
the transaction, then if F_EXCL is given the transaction will fail while
otherwise it will be re-added.
> > If so, why not temporarily make the timeouts effective right away
> > and then roll back?
>
> You mean, from the preparation phase? Then we need to undo what has
> been done, in case of --check / abort path is exercised, this might
> just create a bogus element listing.
True. Am I correct that we can't implement the "expand" via
del+add because of stateful objects?
I fear we will need to circle back to rbtree then, I'll followup
there (wrt. on-demand gc).
> No need for rollback if new timeout is store in the transaction
> object, we just set the new timeout from _commit() step in the
> NEWSETELEM case, which has to deal with updates. Other objects follow
> a similar approach.
Got it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-02 13:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-29 16:44 [PATCH nf 1/2] netfilter: nft_set_rbtree: move sync GC from insert path to set->ops->commit Pablo Neira Ayuso
2023-09-29 16:44 ` [PATCH nf 2/2] netfilter: nft_set_rbtree: remove async GC Pablo Neira Ayuso
2023-09-29 22:25 ` [PATCH nf 1/2] netfilter: nft_set_rbtree: move sync GC from insert path to set->ops->commit Pablo Neira Ayuso
2023-09-30 8:10 ` Florian Westphal
2023-10-01 20:10 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2023-10-01 21:08 ` Florian Westphal
2023-10-02 8:20 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2023-10-02 8:47 ` Florian Westphal
2023-10-02 10:24 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2023-10-02 12:42 ` update element timeout support [was Re: [PATCH nf 1/2] netfilter: nft_set_rbtree: move sync GC from insert path to set->ops->commit] Pablo Neira Ayuso
2023-10-02 13:58 ` Florian Westphal [this message]
2023-10-02 14:21 ` Florian Westphal
2023-10-03 8:22 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2023-10-03 9:04 ` Florian Westphal
2023-10-03 9:42 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2023-10-03 18:24 ` Florian Westphal
2023-10-04 8:30 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2023-10-02 21:10 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2023-10-02 21:14 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2023-10-02 14:23 ` [PATCH nf 1/2] netfilter: nft_set_rbtree: move sync GC from insert path to set->ops->commit Florian Westphal
2023-10-02 21:37 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2023-10-02 21:42 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
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=20231002135838.GB30843@breakpoint.cc \
--to=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--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).