* Re: conntrack timers usage
[not found] <200810130149.25635.denys@visp.net.lb>
@ 2008-10-13 13:20 ` Patrick McHardy
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Patrick McHardy @ 2008-10-13 13:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Denys Fedoryshchenko; +Cc: netdev, netfilter, Netfilter Development Mailinglist
Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote:
> The story with excessive timers usage continue.
>
> Here is my results from /proc/timer_stats for 30 seconds (150Mbps traffic)
> ...
> And here is netfilter usage, looks like ....
> I did also sysctl -w net.netfilter.nf_conntrack_acct=0
>
> 1, 0 swapper __nf_ct_refresh_acct (death_by_timeout)
> 1, 0 swapper __nf_ct_refresh_acct (death_by_timeout)
> 1, 0 swapper __nf_ct_refresh_acct (death_by_timeout)
> 1, 0 swapper __nf_ct_refresh_acct (death_by_timeout)
> 1, 0 swapper __nf_ct_refresh_acct (death_by_timeout)
> 1, 0 swapper __nf_conntrack_confirm (death_by_timeout)
> 1, 0 swapper __nf_conntrack_confirm (death_by_timeout)
> 1, 0 swapper __nf_conntrack_confirm (death_by_timeout)
> 1, 0 swapper __nf_conntrack_confirm (death_by_timeout)
> 1, 0 swapper __nf_conntrack_confirm (death_by_timeout)
> 1, 0 swapper __nf_conntrack_confirm (death_by_timeout)
> 1, 0 swapper __nf_conntrack_confirm (death_by_timeout)
> 1, 0 swapper __nf_conntrack_confirm (death_by_timeout)
> ....
>
> Router-Dora ~ # cat /proc/timer_stats |grep '__nf'|wc -l
> 1005
>
> Is it important to do so much calls to timers in conntrack?
> Precision on it is not more than 1 second.
There's one timer per conntrack. As you noticed, we only update
timers for delta >= 1s, but with many conntracks, that still adds
up to a lot.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread