On 22/09/16 11:33, Paolo Abeni wrote:
Hi Eric,
On Wed, 2016-09-21 at 16:31 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
quoted
Also does inet_diag properly give the forward_alloc to user ?
$ ss -mua
State Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address:Port Peer Addres
s:Port
UNCONN 51584 0 *:52460 *:*
skmem:(r51584,rb327680,t0,tb327680,f1664,w0,o0,bl0,d575)
Thank you very much for reviewing this!
My bad, there is still a race which leads to temporary negative values
of fwd. I feel the fix is trivial but it needs some investigation.
quoted
Couldn't we instead use an union of an atomic_t and int for
sk->sk_forward_alloc ?
That was our first attempt, but we had some issue on mem scheduling; if
we use:
if (atomic_sub_return(size, &sk->sk_forward_alloc_atomic) < 0) {
// fwd alloc
}
that leads to inescapable, temporary, negative value for
sk->sk_forward_alloc.
Another option would be:
again:
fwd = atomic_read(&sk->sk_forward_alloc_atomic);
if (fwd > size) {
if (atomic_cmpxchg(&sk->sk_forward_alloc_atomic, fwd, fwd - size) != fwd)
goto again;
} else
// fwd alloc
which would be bad under high contention.
Apologies if I'm misunderstanding the problem, but couldn't you have two
atomic_t fields, 'internal' and 'external' forward_alloc. Then
if (atomic_sub_return(size, &sk->sk_forward_alloc_internal) < 0) {
atomic_sub(size, &sk->sk_forward_alloc);
// fwd alloc
} else {
atomic_add(size, &sk->sk_forward_alloc_internal);
}
or something like that. Then sk->sk_forward_alloc never sees a negative
value, and is always >= sk->sk_forward_alloc_internal. Of course places
that go the other way would have to add to sk->sk_forward_alloc first,
before adding to sk->sk_forward_alloc_internal, to maintain that invariant.
Would that help matters at all?
-Ed