[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100920.130047.124017922.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 13:00:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: nbowler@...iptictech.com
Cc: eric.dumazet@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Regression, bisected: reference leak with IPSec since ~2.6.31
From: Nick Bowler <nbowler@...iptictech.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 15:52:56 -0400
> On 2010-09-20 20:20 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> If you change your program to send small frames (so they are not
>> fragmented), is the problem still present ?
>
> I changed MAX_DGRAM_SIZE in the test program to 1000 (mtu on the
> interface is 1500). The short answer is that the references are
> not leaked, and things seem to get cleaned up. So the rest of this
> mail probably describes a separate issue.
>
> The long answer, however, is interesting: With latest Linus' git, the
> references are cleaned up much later than I would expect. After running
> the test program and flushing the SAD/SPD, the reference count is still
> 1. If I repeat the test immediately, the reference count will increase
> further. I can easily raise the reference count to, say, 100. Now, if
> I wait a while (10 minutes or so), the reference count will still be
> 100. However, when I run the setkey script after this delay, the
> reference count drops immediately to 1. If I then flush the SAD/SPD, it
> drops to 0.
This is because we actually cache IPSEC routes correctly, previously
we'd create a new routing cache entry every time a lookup happened.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists