[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [Xen-devel] Re: SKB paged fragment lifecycle on receive
On 06/24/2011 10:56 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > Le vendredi 24 juin 2011 Ã 10:29 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge a Ãcrit : >> On 06/24/2011 08:43 AM, Ian Campbell wrote: >>> We've previously looked into solutions using the skb destructor callback >>> but that falls over if the skb is cloned since you also need to know >>> when the clone is destroyed. Jeremy Fitzhardinge and I subsequently >>> looked at the possibility of a no-clone skb flag (i.e. always forcing a >>> copy instead of a clone) but IIRC honouring it universally turned into a >>> very twisty maze with a number of nasty corner cases etc. It also seemed >>> that the proportion of SKBs which get cloned at least once appeared as >>> if it could be quite high which would presumably make the performance >>> impact unacceptable when using the flag. Another issue with using the >>> skb destructor is that functions such as __pskb_pull_tail will eat (and >>> free) pages from the start of the frag array such that by the time the >>> skb destructor is called they are no longer there. >>> >>> AIUI Rusty Russell had previously looked into a per-page destructor in >>> the shinfo but found that it couldn't be made to work (I don't remember >>> why, or if I even knew at the time). Could that be an approach worth >>> reinvestigating? >>> >>> I can't really think of any other solution which doesn't involve some >>> sort of driver callback at the time a page is free()d. > This reminds me the packet mmap (tx path) games we play with pages. > > net/packet/af_packet.c : tpacket_destruct_skb(), poking > TP_STATUS_AVAILABLE back to user to tell him he can reuse space... Yes. Its similar in the sense that its a tx from a page which isn't being handed over entirely to the network stack, but has some other longer-term lifetime. >> One simple approach would be to simply make sure that we retain a page >> reference on any granted pages so that the network stack's put pages >> will never result in them being released back to the kernel. We can >> also install an skb destructor. If it sees a page being released with a >> refcount of 1, then we know its our own reference and can free the page >> immediately. If the refcount is > 1 then we can add it to a queue of >> pending pages, which can be periodically polled to free pages whose >> other references have been dropped. >> >> However, the question is how large will this queue get? If it remains >> small then this scheme could be entirely practical. But if almost every >> page ends up having transient stray references, it could become very >> awkward. >> >> So it comes down to "how useful is an skb destructor callback as a >> heuristic for page free"? >> > Dangerous I would say. You could have a skb1 page transferred to another > skb2, and call skb1 destructor way before page being released. Under what circumstances would that happen? > TCP stack could do that in tcp_collapse() [ it currently doesnt play > with pages ] Do you mean "dangerous" in the sense that many pages could end up being tied up in the pending-release queue? We'd always check the page refcount, so it should never release pages prematurely. Thanks, J _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |