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]
Date:	Tue, 26 Jun 2012 01:37:30 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv4: Remove unnecessary code from rt_check_expire().

From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 10:23:04 +0200

> Thats because gc_interval (60) is big compared to ip_rt_gc_timeout
> (300)
> 
> So each time rt_check_expire() triggers, we handle a big part of the
> cache. On big servers I had to lower gc_interval to smooth things.

I know it's stupid, that's why I want to eventually kill this off
completely.

> Garbage collect is needed to not waste kernel memory, even on legitimate
> traffic on a typical web server.
> 
> Taken from my 8GB machine : 
> 
> # cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/route/gc_thresh
> 262144
> 
> 320 bytes per dst : 262144*320 = 83886080 bytes to store one dst per hash chain.

83MB on a machine with 8GB of ram that does enough networking to fill
the routing cache.  This sounds absolutely reasonable to me.

> Also, why keeping a dst in cache if no traffic uses it in a 5 minutes period ?

Traffic is bursty and periodic.

And think, we don't do any stupidity like this for the inetpeer cache
and no small cute animals have died as a result.
--
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