Re: [2.6 patch] always export sysctl_{r,w}mem_max

5 messages, 3 authors, 2007-10-26 · open the first message on its own page

Re: [2.6 patch] always export sysctl_{r,w}mem_max

From: Eric W. Biederman <hidden>
Date: 2007-10-26 23:21:13 

Adrian Bunk [off-list ref] writes:

This patch fixes the following build error with CONFIG_SYSCTL=n:

<--  snip  -->

...
ERROR: "sysctl_rmem_max" [fs/dlm/dlm.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "sysctl_wmem_max" [drivers/net/rrunner.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "sysctl_rmem_max" [drivers/net/rrunner.ko] undefined!
make[2]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
I was going to ask if allowing drivers to increase rmem_max
is something that we want to do.  Apparently the road runner
driver has been doing this since the 2.6.12-rc1 when the
git repository starts so this probably isn't a latent bug.

So removing unnecessary #ifdef sounds good to me.

Acked-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <redacted>
quoted hunk
<--  snip  -->

Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>

---
22ea6cd56e4fa844b0b1bbab2542f09eb6c9a5ab 
diff --git a/net/core/sock.c b/net/core/sock.c
index febbcbc..ee1cc4f 100644
--- a/net/core/sock.c
+++ b/net/core/sock.c
@@ -2004,7 +2004,5 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(sock_wmalloc);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(sock_i_uid);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(sock_i_ino);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(sysctl_optmem_max);
-#ifdef CONFIG_SYSCTL
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(sysctl_rmem_max);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(sysctl_wmem_max);
-#endif

Re: [2.6 patch] always export sysctl_{r,w}mem_max

From: Rick Jones <hidden>
Date: 2007-10-26 23:32:01 

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Adrian Bunk [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
This patch fixes the following build error with CONFIG_SYSCTL=n:

<--  snip  -->

...
ERROR: "sysctl_rmem_max" [fs/dlm/dlm.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "sysctl_wmem_max" [drivers/net/rrunner.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "sysctl_rmem_max" [drivers/net/rrunner.ko] undefined!
make[2]: *** [__modpost] Error 1

I was going to ask if allowing drivers to increase rmem_max
is something that we want to do.  Apparently the road runner
driver has been doing this since the 2.6.12-rc1 when the
git repository starts so this probably isn't a latent bug.
Although it does rather sound like a driver writer yanking the rope from the 
hand's of the sysadmin and hanging him with it rather than letting the sysadmin 
do it himself.  I've seen other drivers' README's suggesting larger mem's but 
not their sources doing it.

rick jones

Re: [2.6 patch] always export sysctl_{r,w}mem_max

From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Date: 2007-10-26 23:43:26 

From: Rick Jones <redacted>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:31:47 -0700

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
quoted
Adrian Bunk [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
This patch fixes the following build error with CONFIG_SYSCTL=n:

<--  snip  -->

...
ERROR: "sysctl_rmem_max" [fs/dlm/dlm.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "sysctl_wmem_max" [drivers/net/rrunner.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "sysctl_rmem_max" [drivers/net/rrunner.ko] undefined!
make[2]: *** [__modpost] Error 1

I was going to ask if allowing drivers to increase rmem_max
is something that we want to do.  Apparently the road runner
driver has been doing this since the 2.6.12-rc1 when the
git repository starts so this probably isn't a latent bug.
Although it does rather sound like a driver writer yanking the rope from the 
hand's of the sysadmin and hanging him with it rather than letting the sysadmin 
do it himself.  I've seen other drivers' README's suggesting larger mem's but 
not their sources doing it.
I really don't think what the roadrunner driver is doing is
correct at all.

I also think what DLM is doing is wrong too.

If DLM really wants minimum, it can use SO_SNDBUFFORCE and
SO_RCVBUFFORCE socket options and use whatever limits it
likes.

But even this is questionable.

I'll put in Adrian's patch to fix the build as a first
priority, but in the long term this cruft has gotta go.

Re: [2.6 patch] always export sysctl_{r,w}mem_max

From: Rick Jones <hidden>
Date: 2007-10-26 23:46:55 

David Miller wrote:
If DLM really wants minimum, it can use SO_SNDBUFFORCE and
SO_RCVBUFFORCE socket options and use whatever limits it
likes.

But even this is questionable.
Drift...

Is that something netperf should be using though?  Right now it uses the regular 
SO_[SND|RCV]BUF calls and is at the mercy of sysctls.  I wonder if it would be 
better to have it use their FORCE versions to make life easier on the 
benchmarker - such as myself - who has an unfortunate habit of forgetting to 
update sysctl.conf :)

rick jones

Re: [2.6 patch] always export sysctl_{r,w}mem_max

From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Date: 2007-10-26 23:52:45 

From: Rick Jones <redacted>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:46:36 -0700

David Miller wrote:
quoted
If DLM really wants minimum, it can use SO_SNDBUFFORCE and
SO_RCVBUFFORCE socket options and use whatever limits it
likes.

But even this is questionable.
Drift...

Is that something netperf should be using though?  Right now it uses the regular 
SO_[SND|RCV]BUF calls and is at the mercy of sysctls.  I wonder if it would be 
better to have it use their FORCE versions to make life easier on the 
benchmarker - such as myself - who has an unfortunate habit of forgetting to 
update sysctl.conf :)
The force calls are for root only.

And I want to remind you that explicitly setting socket
buffer sizes hurts performance with TCP.  I know you know
this but it bears restating for the benefit of others.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help