On Tue, Nov 05, 2024 at 05:51:35PM +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2024 at 02:35:16PM +0100, Phil Sutter wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 11:04:11PM +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> > > Update json parser to collapse {add,create} element commands to reduce
> > > memory consumption in the case of large sets defined by one element per
> > > command:
> > >
> > > {"nftables": [{"add": {"element": {"family": "ip", "table": "x", "name":
> > > "y", "elem": [{"set": ["1.1.0.0"]}]}}},...]}
> >
> > Thanks for the fix!
> >
> > > Add CTX_F_COLLAPSED flag to report that command has been collapsed.
> >
> > I had come up with a similar solution (but did not find time to submit
> > it last week). My solution to the "what to return" problem was to
> > introduce a 'static struct cmd cmd_nop' and return its address. Your
> > flag way is fine, too from my PoV.
>
> OK, I'm going to push it out then.
>
> > > This patch reduces memory consumption by ~32% this case.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 20f1c60ac8c8 ("src: collapse set element commands from parser")
> > > Reported-by: Eric Garver <eric@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > Side note: While profiling, I can still see lots json objects, this
> > > results in memory consumption that is 5 times than native
> > > representation. Error reporting is also lagging behind, it should be
> > > possible to add a json_t pointer to struct location to relate
> > > expressions and json objects.
> >
> > I can have a look at mem use if I find spare time (TM).
>
> I understand, that is always the issue.
It's on my TODO at least, let's hope for the best.
> > We already record links between struct cmd and json_t objects for echo
> > mode (and only then). The problem with error reporting in my opinion is
> > the lack of location data in json_t. You might remember, I tried to
> > extend libjansson to our needs but my MR[1] is being ignored for more
> > than a year now. Should we just ship an extended copy in nftables?
>
> Do you still have the link with your proposal around? I don't find it
> in my notes anymore.
Ah, prolly forgot to resolve that [1] above:
https://github.com/akheron/jansson/pull/662
> IIRC the rejection came from concerns about increasing memory usage
> for our specific usecase, that was an extra pointer to store location,
> correct?
That and lack of interest in the feature in general. See the linked !461
for some feedback. The uncommented implementation in !662 hides
everything behind a decoder flag and avoids any memory overhead if not
enabled. The only remaining concern I can't address is: "we don't see
this as an important feature that should be included in Jansson."
Cheers, Phil
