Thread (3 messages) flat view 3 messages, 3 authors, 2016-01-15

Re: [PATCH v2] netfilter: nf_conntrack: use safer way to lock all buckets

From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
Date: 2016-01-14 17:25:43
Also in: lkml, netfilter-devel

Sasha Levin [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
When we need to lock all buckets in the connection hashtable we'd attempt to
lock 1024 spinlocks, which is way more preemption levels than supported by
the kernel. Furthermore, this behavior was hidden by checking if lockdep is
enabled, and if it was - use only 8 buckets(!).

Fix this by using a global lock and synchronize all buckets on it when we
need to lock them all. This is pretty heavyweight, but is only done when we
need to resize the hashtable, and that doesn't happen often enough (or at all).
diff --git a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c
index 3cb3cb8..4ccf5ad 100644
--- a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c
+++ b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c
@@ -66,6 +66,21 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(nf_conntrack_locks);
 __cacheline_aligned_in_smp DEFINE_SPINLOCK(nf_conntrack_expect_lock);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(nf_conntrack_expect_lock);
 
+spinlock_t nf_conntrack_locks_all_lock;
+bool nf_conntrack_locks_all;
warning: symbol 'nf_conntrack_locks_all_lock' was not declared. Should it be static?
warning: symbol 'nf_conntrack_locks_all' was not declared.  Should it be static?
+void nf_conntrack_lock(spinlock_t *lock)
__acquires(lock)

It avoids 'context imbalance in 'nf_conntrack_lock' - wrong count at exit'
sparse error.

Other than that this looks good, thanks.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help