[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Persistent grant maps for xen blk drivers
On 19/09/12 11:51, Oliver Chick wrote: > This patch implements persistent grants for the xen-blk{front,back} > mechanism. [...] > We (ijc, and myself) have introduced a new constant, > BLKIF_MAX_PERS_REQUESTS_PER_DEV. This is to prevent a malicious guest > from attempting a DoS, by supplying fresh grefs, causing the Dom0 > kernel from to map excessively. [...] > 2) Otherwise, we revert to non-persistent grants for all future grefs. Why fallback instead of immediately failing the request? > diff --git a/drivers/block/xen-blkback/blkback.c > b/drivers/block/xen-blkback/blkback.c > index 73f196c..f95dee9 100644 > --- a/drivers/block/xen-blkback/blkback.c > +++ b/drivers/block/xen-blkback/blkback.c > @@ -78,6 +78,7 @@ struct pending_req { > unsigned short operation; > int status; > struct list_head free_list; > + u8 is_pers; Using "pers" as an abbreviation for "persistent" isn't obvious. For readability it may be better spell it in full. > +/* > + * Maximum number of persistent grants that can be mapped by Dom0 for each > + * interface. This is set to be the size of the ring, as this is a limit on > + * the number of requests that can be inflight at any one time. 256 imposes > + * an overhead of 11MB of mapped kernel space per interface. > + */ > +#define BLKIF_MAX_PERS_REQUESTS_PER_DEV 256 This 11MB per VBD seems like a lot. With 150 VMs each with 2 VBDs this requires > 3 GB. Is this a scalability problem? Does there need to be a mechanism to expire old maps in blkback? David _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |