| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20110222055553.GA4192@verge.net.au>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 14:56:36 +0900
From: Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
To: Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
Wensong Zhang <wensong@...ux-vs.org>,
Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
lvs-devel@...r.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ipvs: unify the formula to estimate the overhead of
processing connections
On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 05:32:28PM +0800, Changli Gao wrote:
> lc and wlc use the same formula, but lblc and lblcr use another one. There
> is no reason for using two different formulas for the lc variants.
>
> The formula used by lc is used by all the lc variants in this patch.
Wensong, are you ok with this version of the patch?
>
> Signed-off-by: Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>
> ---
> v2: use ip_vs_dest_conn_overhead() instead.
> include/net/ip_vs.h | 14 ++++++++++++++
> net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_lblc.c | 13 +++----------
> net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_lblcr.c | 25 +++++++------------------
> net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_lc.c | 18 +-----------------
> net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_wlc.c | 20 ++------------------
> 5 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 63 deletions(-)
> diff --git a/include/net/ip_vs.h b/include/net/ip_vs.h
> index 5d75fea..e80ffb7 100644
> --- a/include/net/ip_vs.h
> +++ b/include/net/ip_vs.h
> @@ -1241,6 +1241,20 @@ static inline void ip_vs_conn_drop_conntrack(struct ip_vs_conn *cp)
> /* CONFIG_IP_VS_NFCT */
> #endif
>
> +static inline unsigned int
> +ip_vs_dest_conn_overhead(struct ip_vs_dest *dest)
> +{
> + /*
> + * We think the overhead of processing active connections is 256
> + * times higher than that of inactive connections in average. (This
> + * 256 times might not be accurate, we will change it later) We
> + * use the following formula to estimate the overhead now:
> + * dest->activeconns*256 + dest->inactconns
> + */
> + return (atomic_read(&dest->activeconns) << 8) +
> + atomic_read(&dest->inactconns);
> +}
> +
> #endif /* __KERNEL__ */
>
> #endif /* _NET_IP_VS_H */
> diff --git a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_lblc.c b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_lblc.c
> index 00b5ffa..58ae403 100644
> --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_lblc.c
> +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_lblc.c
> @@ -389,12 +389,7 @@ __ip_vs_lblc_schedule(struct ip_vs_service *svc)
> int loh, doh;
>
> /*
> - * We think the overhead of processing active connections is fifty
> - * times higher than that of inactive connections in average. (This
> - * fifty times might not be accurate, we will change it later.) We
> - * use the following formula to estimate the overhead:
> - * dest->activeconns*50 + dest->inactconns
> - * and the load:
> + * We use the following formula to estimate the load:
> * (dest overhead) / dest->weight
> *
> * Remember -- no floats in kernel mode!!!
> @@ -410,8 +405,7 @@ __ip_vs_lblc_schedule(struct ip_vs_service *svc)
> continue;
> if (atomic_read(&dest->weight) > 0) {
> least = dest;
> - loh = atomic_read(&least->activeconns) * 50
> - + atomic_read(&least->inactconns);
> + loh = ip_vs_dest_conn_overhead(least);
> goto nextstage;
> }
> }
> @@ -425,8 +419,7 @@ __ip_vs_lblc_schedule(struct ip_vs_service *svc)
> if (dest->flags & IP_VS_DEST_F_OVERLOAD)
> continue;
>
> - doh = atomic_read(&dest->activeconns) * 50
> - + atomic_read(&dest->inactconns);
> + doh = ip_vs_dest_conn_overhead(dest);
> if (loh * atomic_read(&dest->weight) >
> doh * atomic_read(&least->weight)) {
> least = dest;
> diff --git a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_lblcr.c b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_lblcr.c
> index bfa25f1..2ddefe8 100644
> --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_lblcr.c
> +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_lblcr.c
> @@ -178,8 +178,7 @@ static inline struct ip_vs_dest *ip_vs_dest_set_min(struct ip_vs_dest_set *set)
>
> if ((atomic_read(&least->weight) > 0)
> && (least->flags & IP_VS_DEST_F_AVAILABLE)) {
> - loh = atomic_read(&least->activeconns) * 50
> - + atomic_read(&least->inactconns);
> + loh = ip_vs_dest_conn_overhead(least);
> goto nextstage;
> }
> }
> @@ -192,8 +191,7 @@ static inline struct ip_vs_dest *ip_vs_dest_set_min(struct ip_vs_dest_set *set)
> if (dest->flags & IP_VS_DEST_F_OVERLOAD)
> continue;
>
> - doh = atomic_read(&dest->activeconns) * 50
> - + atomic_read(&dest->inactconns);
> + doh = ip_vs_dest_conn_overhead(dest);
> if ((loh * atomic_read(&dest->weight) >
> doh * atomic_read(&least->weight))
> && (dest->flags & IP_VS_DEST_F_AVAILABLE)) {
> @@ -228,8 +226,7 @@ static inline struct ip_vs_dest *ip_vs_dest_set_max(struct ip_vs_dest_set *set)
> list_for_each_entry(e, &set->list, list) {
> most = e->dest;
> if (atomic_read(&most->weight) > 0) {
> - moh = atomic_read(&most->activeconns) * 50
> - + atomic_read(&most->inactconns);
> + moh = ip_vs_dest_conn_overhead(most);
> goto nextstage;
> }
> }
> @@ -239,8 +236,7 @@ static inline struct ip_vs_dest *ip_vs_dest_set_max(struct ip_vs_dest_set *set)
> nextstage:
> list_for_each_entry(e, &set->list, list) {
> dest = e->dest;
> - doh = atomic_read(&dest->activeconns) * 50
> - + atomic_read(&dest->inactconns);
> + doh = ip_vs_dest_conn_overhead(dest);
> /* moh/mw < doh/dw ==> moh*dw < doh*mw, where mw,dw>0 */
> if ((moh * atomic_read(&dest->weight) <
> doh * atomic_read(&most->weight))
> @@ -563,12 +559,7 @@ __ip_vs_lblcr_schedule(struct ip_vs_service *svc)
> int loh, doh;
>
> /*
> - * We think the overhead of processing active connections is fifty
> - * times higher than that of inactive connections in average. (This
> - * fifty times might not be accurate, we will change it later.) We
> - * use the following formula to estimate the overhead:
> - * dest->activeconns*50 + dest->inactconns
> - * and the load:
> + * We use the following formula to estimate the load:
> * (dest overhead) / dest->weight
> *
> * Remember -- no floats in kernel mode!!!
> @@ -585,8 +576,7 @@ __ip_vs_lblcr_schedule(struct ip_vs_service *svc)
>
> if (atomic_read(&dest->weight) > 0) {
> least = dest;
> - loh = atomic_read(&least->activeconns) * 50
> - + atomic_read(&least->inactconns);
> + loh = ip_vs_dest_conn_overhead(least);
> goto nextstage;
> }
> }
> @@ -600,8 +590,7 @@ __ip_vs_lblcr_schedule(struct ip_vs_service *svc)
> if (dest->flags & IP_VS_DEST_F_OVERLOAD)
> continue;
>
> - doh = atomic_read(&dest->activeconns) * 50
> - + atomic_read(&dest->inactconns);
> + doh = ip_vs_dest_conn_overhead(dest);
> if (loh * atomic_read(&dest->weight) >
> doh * atomic_read(&least->weight)) {
> least = dest;
> diff --git a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_lc.c b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_lc.c
> index 4f69db1..160cb80 100644
> --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_lc.c
> +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_lc.c
> @@ -22,22 +22,6 @@
>
> #include <net/ip_vs.h>
>
> -
> -static inline unsigned int
> -ip_vs_lc_dest_overhead(struct ip_vs_dest *dest)
> -{
> - /*
> - * We think the overhead of processing active connections is 256
> - * times higher than that of inactive connections in average. (This
> - * 256 times might not be accurate, we will change it later) We
> - * use the following formula to estimate the overhead now:
> - * dest->activeconns*256 + dest->inactconns
> - */
> - return (atomic_read(&dest->activeconns) << 8) +
> - atomic_read(&dest->inactconns);
> -}
> -
> -
> /*
> * Least Connection scheduling
> */
> @@ -62,7 +46,7 @@ ip_vs_lc_schedule(struct ip_vs_service *svc, const struct sk_buff *skb)
> if ((dest->flags & IP_VS_DEST_F_OVERLOAD) ||
> atomic_read(&dest->weight) == 0)
> continue;
> - doh = ip_vs_lc_dest_overhead(dest);
> + doh = ip_vs_dest_conn_overhead(dest);
> if (!least || doh < loh) {
> least = dest;
> loh = doh;
> diff --git a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_wlc.c b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_wlc.c
> index bbddfdb..db751f5 100644
> --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_wlc.c
> +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_wlc.c
> @@ -27,22 +27,6 @@
>
> #include <net/ip_vs.h>
>
> -
> -static inline unsigned int
> -ip_vs_wlc_dest_overhead(struct ip_vs_dest *dest)
> -{
> - /*
> - * We think the overhead of processing active connections is 256
> - * times higher than that of inactive connections in average. (This
> - * 256 times might not be accurate, we will change it later) We
> - * use the following formula to estimate the overhead now:
> - * dest->activeconns*256 + dest->inactconns
> - */
> - return (atomic_read(&dest->activeconns) << 8) +
> - atomic_read(&dest->inactconns);
> -}
> -
> -
> /*
> * Weighted Least Connection scheduling
> */
> @@ -71,7 +55,7 @@ ip_vs_wlc_schedule(struct ip_vs_service *svc, const struct sk_buff *skb)
> if (!(dest->flags & IP_VS_DEST_F_OVERLOAD) &&
> atomic_read(&dest->weight) > 0) {
> least = dest;
> - loh = ip_vs_wlc_dest_overhead(least);
> + loh = ip_vs_dest_conn_overhead(least);
> goto nextstage;
> }
> }
> @@ -85,7 +69,7 @@ ip_vs_wlc_schedule(struct ip_vs_service *svc, const struct sk_buff *skb)
> list_for_each_entry_continue(dest, &svc->destinations, n_list) {
> if (dest->flags & IP_VS_DEST_F_OVERLOAD)
> continue;
> - doh = ip_vs_wlc_dest_overhead(dest);
> + doh = ip_vs_dest_conn_overhead(dest);
> if (loh * atomic_read(&dest->weight) >
> doh * atomic_read(&least->weight)) {
> least = dest;
>
--
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