netdev - Re: [PATCH] conntrack: Reduce conntrack count in nf_conntrack

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: <49C8E268.6090507@trash.net>
Date:	Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:38:48 +0100
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
CC:	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()

Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Patrick McHardy a écrit :
>>> I forgot to say this is what we do for 'struct file' freeing as well. We
>>> decrement nr_files in file_free(), not in file_free_rcu()
>>
>> While temporarily exceeding the limit by up to 10000 entries is
>> quite a lot, I guess the important thing is that it can't grow
>> unbounded, so I think this patch is fine.
>>
> 
> Maybe we could use SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU thing and no more call_rcu() queueing
> problem. That would better use CPU caches as well...

I'm not sure I understand the rules correctly, but we'd still
have to wait for the grace period before an object can be reused,
no?



--
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