On Thursday 05 October 2006 12:21, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 11:56:24AM +0200, Eric Dumazet ([email protected])
> > I may be wrong, but what is currently missing for me is :
> >
> > - No hardcoded limit on the max number of events. (A process that can
> > open XXX.XXX files should be allowed to open a kevent queue with at least
> > XXX.XXX events). Right now thats not clear what happens IF the current
> > limit is reached.
>
> This forces to overflows in fixed sized memory mapped buffer.
> If we remove memory mapped buffer or will allow to have overflows (and
> thus skipped entries) keven can easily scale to that limits (tested with
> xx.xxx events though).
What is missing or not obvious is : If events are skipped because of
overflows, What happens ? Connections stuck forever ? Hope that everything
will restore itself ? Is kernel able to SIGNAL this problem to user land ?
>
> > - In order to avoid touching the whole ring buffer, it might be good to
> > be able to reset the indexes to the beginning when ring buffer is empty.
> > (So if the user land is responsive enough to consume events, only first
> > pages of the mapping would be used : that saves L1/L2 cpu caches)
>
> And what happens when there are 3 empty at the beginning and \we need to
> put there 4 ready events?
Re-read what I said : when ring buffer is empty.
When ring buffer is empty, kernel can reset index right before adding XX new
events. You read 3 events consumed, I said : When all ring buffer is empty,
because all previous events were consumed by user land, then we can reset
indexes to 0.
>
> > A plus would be
> >
> > - A working/usable mmap ring buffer implementation, but I think its not
> > mandatory. System calls are not that expensive, especially if you can
> > batch XX events per syscall (like epoll). Nice thing with a ring buffer
> > is that we touch less cache lines than say epoll that have lot of linked
> > structures.
> >
> > About mmap, I think you might want a hybrid thing :
> >
> > One writable page where userland can write its index, (and hold one or
> > more futex shared by kernel) (with appropriate thread locking in case
> > multiple threads want to dequeue events). In fast path, no syscalls are
> > needed to maintain this user index.
> >
> > XXX readonly pages (for user, but r/w for kernel), where kernel write its
> > own index, and events of course.
>
> The problem is in that xxx pages - how many can we eat per kevent
> descriptor? It is pinned memory and thus it is possible to have a DoS.
> If xxx above is not enough to store all events, we will have
> yet-another-broken behaviour like rt-signal queue overflow.
>
Re-read : I have a process that has the right to open XXX.XXX handles,
allocating XXX.XXX tcp sockets, dentries, files structures, inodes, epoll
events, its obviously already a DOS risk, but controled by 'ulimit -n'
Allocating XXX.XXX * (32 or 64) bytes is a win if I can zap epoll structures
(currently more than 256 bytes per event)
epoll structures are pinned too... what's wrong with that ?
# egrep "filp|poll|TCP|dentries|sock_inode" /proc/slabinfo |cut -c1-50
tw_sock_TCP 1302 2200 192 20 1 :
request_sock_TCP 2046 4260 128 30 1 :
TCP 151509 196910 1472 5 2 :
eventpoll_pwq 146718 199439 72 53 1 :
eventpoll_epi 146718 199360 192 20 1 :
sock_inode_cache 149182 197940 640 6 1 :
filp 149537 202515 256 15 1 :
If you want to protect from DOS, just use ulimit -n 100
Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
