|
On Friday, April 15, 2011 22:11:32 Julian Anastasov wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2011, Hans Schillstrom wrote:
>
> > Hello Julian
> >
> > I'm trying to fix the cleanup process when a namespace get "killed",
> > which is a new feature for ipvs. However an old problem appears again
> >
> > When there has been traffic trough ipvs where the destination is unreachable
> > the usage count on loopback dev increases one for every packet....
>
> What is the kernel version?
net-next-2.6 i.e. 2.6.39-rc2
>
> > I guess thats because of this rule :
> >
> > # ip route list table all
> > ...
> > unreachable default dev lo table 0 proto kernel metric 4294967295 error
> > -101 hoplimit 25
> > ...
> >
> > I made a test just forwarding packets through the same container (ipvs
> > loaded)
> > to an unreachable destination and that test had a balanced count i.e. it
> > was possible to reboot the container.
>
> Can you explain, what do you mean with unreachable
> destination? Are you adding some rejecting route?
This comment from Eric, do explain what happens:
"Hans.
I do know that most outstanding references when you clean up a
container get moved to the loopback device. So it may not originally
be the loopback device itself where the reference counting is wrong.
Eric"
>
> > Do you have an idea why this happens in the ipvs case ?
>
> Do you see with debug level 3 the "Removing destination"
> messages. Only real servers can hold dest->dst_cache reference
> for dev which can be a problem because the real servers are not
> deleted immediately - on traffic they are moved to trash
> list. But ip_vs_trash_cleanup() should remove any left
> structures. You should check in debug that all servers are
> deleted. If all real server structures are freed but
> problem remains we should look more deeply in the
> dest->dst_cache usage. DR or NAT is used?
I have got some wise words from Eric,
i.e. moved all ipvs register/unregister from subsys to device
that solved plenty of my issues
(Thanks Eric)
I'll will post a Patch later on regarding this.
>
> I assume cleanup really happens in this order:
>
> ip_vs_cleanup():
> nf_unregister_hooks()
This will not happens in a namespace since nf_unregister_hooks() is not per
netns.
We might need a flag but I don't think so, further test will show....
> ...
> ip_vs_conn_cleanup()
> ...
> ip_vs_control_cleanup()
>
Regards
Hans
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|
