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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:23:55 -0300 From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca> To: Håkon Bugge <haakon.bugge@...cle.com> Cc: Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>, Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com>, Steve Wise <swise@...ngridcomputing.com>, OFED mailing list <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] RDMA/cma: Make CM response timeout and # CM retries configurable On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 06:58:30PM +0200, Håkon Bugge wrote: > If you refer to the backlog parameter in rdma_listen(), I cannot see > it being used at all for IB. > > For CX-3, which is paravirtualized wrt. MAD packets, it is the proxy > UD receive queue length for the PF driver that can be construed as a > backlog. No, in IB you can drop UD packets if your RQ is full - so the proxy RQ is really part of the overall RQ on QP1. The backlog starts once packets are taken off the RQ and begin the connection accept processing. > Customer configures #VMs and different workload may lead to way > different number of CM connections. The proxying of MAD packet > through the PF driver has a finite packet rate. With 64 VMs, 10.000 > QPs on each, all going down due to a switch failing or similar, you > have 640.000 DREQs to be sent, and with the finite packet rate of MA > packets through the PF, this takes more than the current CM > timeout. And then you re-transmit and increase the burden of the PF > proxying. I feel like the performance of all this proxying is too low to support such a large work load :( Can it be improved? Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists