Hi, On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 07:38:10AM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote: > Phil Sutter <phil@xxxxxx> wrote: > > In order to support the same ruleset sizes as legacy iptables, the > > kernel's limit of 1024 iovecs has to be overcome. Therefore increase > > each iovec's size from 256KB to 4MB. > > > > While being at it, add a log message for failing sendmsg() call. This is > > not supposed to happen, even if the transaction fails. Yet if it does, > > users are left with only a "line XXX failed" message (with line number > > being the COMMIT line). > > > > Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter <phil@xxxxxx> > > --- > > iptables/nft.c | 12 +++++++----- > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/iptables/nft.c b/iptables/nft.c > > index bd840e75f83f4..e19c88ece6c2a 100644 > > --- a/iptables/nft.c > > +++ b/iptables/nft.c > > @@ -88,11 +88,11 @@ int mnl_talk(struct nft_handle *h, struct nlmsghdr *nlh, > > > > #define NFT_NLMSG_MAXSIZE (UINT16_MAX + getpagesize()) > > > > -/* selected batch page is 256 Kbytes long to load ruleset of > > - * half a million rules without hitting -EMSGSIZE due to large > > - * iovec. > > +/* Selected batch page is 4 Mbytes long to support loading a ruleset of 3.5M > > + * rules matching on source and destination address as well as input and output > > + * interfaces. This is what legacy iptables supports. > > */ > > -#define BATCH_PAGE_SIZE getpagesize() * 32 > > +#define BATCH_PAGE_SIZE getpagesize() * 512 > > Why not remove getpagesize() altogether? Yes, why not. At least I couldn't find a reason in git log why it's there in the first place. > The comment assumes getpagesize returns 4096 so might as well just use > "#define BATCH_PAGE_SIZE (4 * 1024 * 1024)" or similar? > > On my system getpagesize() * 512 yields 2097152 ... Thanks for digging deeper, my comment was wrong. I believed the old comment and assumed getpagesize() would return 256k / 32 = 8k but indeed it returns 4k. > > static struct nftnl_batch *mnl_batch_init(void) > > { > > @@ -220,8 +220,10 @@ static int mnl_batch_talk(struct nft_handle *h, int numcmds) > > int err = 0; > > > > ret = mnl_nft_socket_sendmsg(h, numcmds); > > - if (ret == -1) > > + if (ret == -1) { > > + fprintf(stderr, "sendmsg() failed: %s\n", strerror(errno)); > > return -1; > > + } > > Isn't that library code? At the very least this should use > nft_print(). Good point, but for the upcoming identical change to nftables! ;) There I'm still undecided about the best way to handle it. For iptables, I guess this minimal error reporting to stderr for a case that shouldn't happen is fine. ACK? Thanks, Phil