On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 10:58:55PM -0700, Simon Kirby wrote:
> Hello!
>
> In trying to figure out what happened to a box running lots of vsftpd
> since we deployed a CONFIG_NET_NS=y kernel to it, we found that the
> (wall) time needed for cleanup_net() to complete, even on an idle box,
> can be quite long:
>
> #!/bin/bash
>
> ip netns delete test >&/dev/null
> while ip netns add test; do
> echo hi
> ip netns delete test
> done
>
> On my desktop and typical hosts, this prints at only around 4 or 6 per
> second. While this is happening, "vmstat 1" reports 100% idle, and there
> there are D-state processes with stacks similar to:
>
> 30566 [kworker/u16:1] D wait_rcu_gp+0x48, synchronize_sched+0x2f,
> cleanup_net+0xdb, process_one_work+0x175, worker_thread+0x119, kthread+0xbb,
> ret_from_fork+0x7c, 0xffffffffffffffff
>
> 32220 ip D copy_net_ns+0x68, create_new_namespaces+0xfc,
> unshare_nsproxy_namespaces+0x66, SyS_unshare+0x159,
> system_call_fastpath+0x16, 0xffffffffffffffff
>
> copy_net_ns() is waiting on net_mutex which is held by cleanup_net().
>
> vsftpd uses CLONE_NEWNET to set up privsep processes. There is a comment
> about it being really slow before 2.6.35 (it avoids CLONE_NEWNET in that
> case). I didn't find anything that makes 2.6.35 any faster, but on Debian
> 2.6.36-5-amd64, I notice it does seem to be a bit faster than 3.2, 3.10,
> 3.16, though still not anything I'd ever want to rely on per connection.
>
> C implementation of the above: http://0x.ca/sim/ref/tools/netnsloop.c
>
> Kernel stack "top": http://0x.ca/sim/ref/tools/pstack
>
> What's going on here?
That is a bit slow for many configurations, but there are some exceptions.
So, what is your kernel's .config?
Thanx, Paul
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
