Received: by 2002:a25:ad19:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id y25csp3777812ybi; Mon, 29 Jul 2019 12:26:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqydYv4A34onGxYHA8TSAvSYBuC3NOOh89T+Lv+SBG/TgwjqYThL34+bT+OAinQeDX7CuQrL X-Received: by 2002:a63:dd4e:: with SMTP id g14mr33834517pgj.227.1564428390130; Mon, 29 Jul 2019 12:26:30 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1564428390; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=mq1xUE6stCWeBJXEQHQRF/IrsYawQp9zDo78WyUDdetbZeEazUq04gmhRmVEj+MxnR JYkpDy4SfYF15I/ihBZauHWFJ0sXgnxdTTRH+kE4NlTXbqczYIl6PaMV62y3fym8Ppxh JUUlwnBd3vMW0rd7molzPuBKUEzrKH31vJWsVoO3MpvDmAeA5bGClq/pei97iy/Kfx3m QQ12RlgIKlV1ER0TEuJpFLkAS4vNjpsne0aJoqWoyWwCkeC0RFbvPyxUTSG5heWGwZG6 a5ptPFWEOcfxp9jbTkySEUoQW7VS9z9zNqv6eUxqNhqTzwEwCSMNjkMHWcrwtsyj26B0 Hvdw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version; bh=qEnidYZvMtI0djmi8U0ZEWcmJ8XfKi49GrC/Gx0OghM=; b=VGsbw+nDi92bCG8UJywn/0tx06UON/pfWJs1iPi7UtlDNXuuuhbBen38MNnPHjEdrL SBM1lqaMJdohwdbs0V4JQFVlgnr+kj2BBB+TjCjHeEx7yI0on83ZfUTtaK0q6gc6k0wW Gp8oonh0xZRNDg81q4nn4LadkIH/MJlQyLRTEDhAjVDIuch7ym5oRLsyOpBoPTu0W4Vq tvcu45yHqJY+yIshBcp75W1UjNTwE+FV1OcE327A7dTMNBSoOqWsYdPrTgZUshsaPi05 Whn6MJbBHxcQbAZFCcOwete796TiylybSzpzxEW2LDWHOl2jEUVh33Av8iqOqH2i+zWx 4kqw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id z1si28258196plb.41.2019.07.29.12.26.15; Mon, 29 Jul 2019 12:26:30 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728255AbfG2Qlk (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 29 Jul 2019 12:41:40 -0400 Received: from mail-oi1-f193.google.com ([209.85.167.193]:36977 "EHLO mail-oi1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726828AbfG2Qlj (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jul 2019 12:41:39 -0400 Received: by mail-oi1-f193.google.com with SMTP id t76so45769856oih.4 for ; Mon, 29 Jul 2019 09:41:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qEnidYZvMtI0djmi8U0ZEWcmJ8XfKi49GrC/Gx0OghM=; b=LAUdTEN33lwGb3Dhe7Qy00N2LdOn3/Q2wyCkXxtLpdrrcyJMlbEwsDjDuFAShEc/Wz dm/bZQ+2+qm+aXVYY+pzvgLYIFR/1x6JP80hN6AYirExAnpYme92KT1tkjo011V90Ab0 mvZPtuifzOlGuZjdtkmgyJ8LxmPFOrWRny2MlnJe2XdOGA9svRVAM4m3ZfDKaNs/NE4h prUWlU61Jw1D3b2S3YkA4cnA7lkuLPkWcbZmELgvokQ63aflLRXUCcY9sRP3XojVysWB p7Lf2RiXcixeL8WDDUQhZpERJXWpBYZoWxZwXznVKOSmlcnfNpJjvt1aK2N52SOOh6mK Z/HA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVlhKqGQu0Fbt52nYuj2QU7R3izV/Ey0l1kzZqBrSX2o3SInIa2 5noZVl0CcB7ArqDqgQf80T336HhvgVIDpJC8Uq4WTA== X-Received: by 2002:aca:1803:: with SMTP id h3mr20756041oih.24.1564418498709; Mon, 29 Jul 2019 09:41:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190717113030.163499-1-sgarzare@redhat.com> <20190717113030.163499-2-sgarzare@redhat.com> <20190729095956-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20190729153656.zk4q4rob5oi6iq7l@steredhat> <20190729115904-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20190729115904-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> From: Stefano Garzarella Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2019 18:41:27 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] vsock/virtio: limit the memory used per-socket To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Stefan Hajnoczi , "David S. Miller" , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Jason Wang , kvm@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 12:01:37PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 05:36:56PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:04:29AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 01:30:26PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > > > > Since virtio-vsock was introduced, the buffers filled by the host > > > > and pushed to the guest using the vring, are directly queued in > > > > a per-socket list. These buffers are preallocated by the guest > > > > with a fixed size (4 KB). > > > > > > > > The maximum amount of memory used by each socket should be > > > > controlled by the credit mechanism. > > > > The default credit available per-socket is 256 KB, but if we use > > > > only 1 byte per packet, the guest can queue up to 262144 of 4 KB > > > > buffers, using up to 1 GB of memory per-socket. In addition, the > > > > guest will continue to fill the vring with new 4 KB free buffers > > > > to avoid starvation of other sockets. > > > > > > > > This patch mitigates this issue copying the payload of small > > > > packets (< 128 bytes) into the buffer of last packet queued, in > > > > order to avoid wasting memory. > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi > > > > Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella > > > > > > This is good enough for net-next, but for net I think we > > > should figure out how to address the issue completely. > > > Can we make the accounting precise? What happens to > > > performance if we do? > > > > > > > In order to do more precise accounting maybe we can use the buffer size, > > instead of payload size when we update the credit available. > > In this way, the credit available for each socket will reflect the memory > > actually used. > > > > I should check better, because I'm not sure what happen if the peer sees > > 1KB of space available, then it sends 1KB of payload (using a 4KB > > buffer). > > The other option is to copy each packet in a new buffer like I did in > > the v2 [2], but this forces us to make a copy for each packet that does > > not fill the entire buffer, perhaps too expensive. > > > > [2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10938741/ > > > > So one thing we can easily do is to under-report the > available credit. E.g. if we copy up to 256bytes, > then report just 256bytes for every buffer in the queue. > Ehm sorry, I got lost :( Can you explain better? Thanks, Stefano