netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 net-next-2.6] netfilter: x_tables: dont block BH while reading counters

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 20 Dec 2010 15:45:46 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...x.dk>
Cc:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
	netfilter-devel <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 net-next-2.6] netfilter: x_tables: dont block BH
 while reading counters

Le lundi 20 décembre 2010 à 14:42 +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer a
écrit :
> I have tested the patch on 2.6.35.  Which implies I also needed to
> cherry-pick 870f67dcf7ef, which implements the vzalloc() call. (Latest
> net-next has a problem with my HP CCISS driver/controller or the PCI
> layout, and will not boot)
> 

Ah wait, you need to switch from cciss to hpsa driver, I hit same
problem some weeks ago ;) (and eventually rename your partitions
to /dev/sdaX instead of /dev/cciss/c0d0pX)


> According to the function_graph trace, the execution time of
> get_counters() has increased (approx) from 109 ms to 120 ms, which is
> the expected result.
> 
> The results are not all positive, but I think its related to the
> debugging options I have enabled.
> 
> Because I now see packet drops if my 1Gbit/s pktgen script are sending
> packet with a packet size below 512 bytes, which is "only" approx 230
> kpps (this is 1Gbit/s on my 10G labsetup where I have seen 5 Mpps).
> 



> There is no packet overruns/drops, iif I run "iptables -vnL >
> /dev/null" without tracing enabled and only 1Gbit/s pktgen at 512
> bytes packets.  If I enable tracing while calling iptables I see
> packet drops/overruns.  So I guess this is caused by the tracing
> overhead.

yes, probably :)

> 
> I'll try to rerun my test without all the lock debugging options
> enabled.
> 

Thanks !


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html