[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55DD9D3D.6050003@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 16:34:29 +0530
From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC: davem@...emloft.net, kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, jmorris@...ei.org,
yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, kaber@...sh.net, jiri@...nulli.us,
edumazet@...gle.com, hannes@...essinduktion.org,
tom@...bertland.com, azhou@...ira.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
ipm@...rality.org.uk, nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
anton@....ibm.com, nacc@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] net: Optimize snmp stat aggregation by walking
all the percpu data at once
On 08/25/2015 09:30 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-08-25 at 21:17 +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote:
>> On 08/25/2015 07:58 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>> This is a great idea, but kcalloc()/kmalloc() can fail and you'll crash
>>> the whole kernel at this point.
>>>
>>
>> Good catch, and my bad. Though system is in bad memory condition,
>> since fill_stat is not critical for the system do you think silently
>> returning from here is a good idea?
>> or do you think we should handle with -ENOMEM way up.?
>
> Hmm... presumably these 288 bytes could be allocated in
> inet6_fill_ifla6_attrs() stack frame.
Correct, since we need to allocate for IPSTATS_MIB_MAX, we could do
this in even snmp6_fill_stats() stack frame.
--
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