[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49C8FA87.2030106@trash.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:21:43 +0100
From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To: mbizon@...ebox.fr
CC: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
Joakim Tjernlund <Joakim.Tjernlund@...nsmode.se>,
avorontsov@...mvista.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] conntrack: Reduce conntrack count in nf_conntrack_free()
Maxime Bizon wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-03-24 at 13:07 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
>> We use RCU to defer freeing of conntrack structures. In DOS situation,
>> RCU might accumulate about 10.000 elements per CPU in its internal
>> queues. To get accurate conntrack counts (at the expense of slightly
>> more RAM used), we might consider conntrack counter not taking into
>> account "about to be freed elements, waiting in RCU queues". We thus
>> decrement it in nf_conntrack_free(), not in the RCU callback.
>
> Your patch fixes the problem on my board too (embedded mips router
> 250Mhz), thanks.
>
> Yet I'm concerned about what you said concerning RAM usage. I have a
> very small amount on memory left on my board (less than 4M), and I tuned
> ip route cache size and nf_conntrack_max to make sure I won't go OOM.
>
> With your patch, does it mean 10000 conntrack entries can be allocated
> while nf_conntrack_max is say only 2048 ?
Temporarily under worst-case circumstances, yes. Eric is already working
on his proposed improvement though :)
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists