netdev - Re: [PATCH 4/4] udp: memory accounting in IPv4

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]

Message-ID: <47577A72.10205@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 05 Dec 2007 23:28:34 -0500
From:	Hideo AOKI <haoki@...hat.com>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
	Satoshi Oshima <satoshi.oshima.fk@...achi.com>,
	Bill Fink <billfink@...dspring.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
	yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
	Yumiko Sugita <yumiko.sugita.yf@...achi.com>, haoki@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] udp: memory accounting in IPv4

Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 07:14:26PM -0500, Hideo AOKI wrote:
>> Let me try to use sk_forward_alloc at first, while percpu storage
>> is an interesting idea.
> 
> Actually I don't think sk_forward_alloc would work for UDP because
> it runs lockless (unlike TCP which is run under a the socket lock).
> 
> So it's either going to be the atomic op or per-cpu counters.  For
> me the atomic op isn't the issue, it's the SMP cache-line bouncing
> that's more important so having something that did atomic ops on a
> socket counter which then feeds into the global counter would solve
> my concerns.
> 
> But let's wait and see what Dave has to say about this too.

Hello,

I suppose that he also wants to have per-socket accounting to avoid
global counter access.

To achieve this, I think I have three ideas at present. I'd
appreciate if you let me know acceptable idea or any suggestions.

1. Using sk_forward_alloc and adding socket lock

   UDP already uses a socket lock to send message. However, it doesn't
   use the lock to receive message. I wonder if we can also use the
   lock when sk_forward_alloc is updated in receive processing.
   I understand performance issue might occur, but ...

2. Adding new atomic_t variable for memory accounting

   Datagram protocols will use the variable for per-socket memory
   accounting. Stream protocols continue to use sk_forward_alloc.

3. Replacing current sk_forward_alloc with union type

   Stream protocols use the union as int, and datagram protocols use
   it as atomic_t.

Best regards,
Hideo

-- 
Hitachi Computer Products (America) Inc.
--
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