lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <b1ba05256affe171c2afca6c3aceeb7a@codeaurora.org> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 15:50:23 +0530 From: stummala@...eaurora.org To: tytso@....edu, adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, jack@...e.cz, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Cc: stummala@...eaurora.org Subject: huge fsync latencies for a small file on ext4 Hi, I am observing huge fsync latencies for a small file under the below test scenario - process A - Issue async write of 4GB using dd command (say large_file) on /data mounted with ext4: dd if=/dev/zero of=/data/testfile bs=1M count=4096 process B - In parallel another process wrote a small 4KB data to another file (say, small_file) and has issued fsync on this file. Problem - The fsync() on 4KB file, is taking upto ~30sec (worst case latency). This is tested on an eMMC based device. Observations - This happens when the small_file and large_file both are part of the same committing transaction or when the small_file is part of the running transaction while large_file is part of the committing transaction. During the commit of a transaction which includes large_file, the jbd2 thread does journal_finish_inode_data_buffers() by calling filemap_fdatawait_keep_errors() on the file's inode address space. While this is happening, if the writeback thread is running in parallel for the large_file, then filemap_fdatawait_keep_errors() could potentially run in a loop of all the pages (upto 4GB of data) and also wait for all the file's data to be written to the disk in the current transaction context itself. At the time of calling journal_finish_inode_data_buffers(), the file size is of only 150MB. and by the time filemap_fdatawait_keep_errors() returns, the file size is 4GB and the page index also points to 4GB file offset in __filemap_fdatawait_range(), indicating that is has scanned and waited for writeback all the pages upto 4GB and not just 150MB. Ideally, I think the jbd2 thread should have waited for only the amount of data it has submitted as part of the current transaction and not to wait for the on-going pages that are getting tagged for writeback in parallel in another context. So along these lines, I have tried to use the inode's size at the time of calling journal_finish_inode_data_buffers() as below - diff --git a/fs/jbd2/commit.c b/fs/jbd2/commit.c index 2eb55c3..e86cf67 100644 --- a/fs/jbd2/commit.c +++ b/fs/jbd2/commit.c @@ -261,8 +261,8 @@ static int journal_finish_inode_data_buffers(journal_t *journal, continue; jinode->i_flags |= JI_COMMIT_RUNNING; spin_unlock(&journal->j_list_lock); - err = filemap_fdatawait_keep_errors( - jinode->i_vfs_inode->i_mapping); + err = filemap_fdatawait_range(jinode->i_vfs_inode->i_mapping, + 0, i_size_read(jinode->i_vfs_inode->i_mapping->host)); if (!ret) ret = err; spin_lock(&journal->j_list_lock); With this, the fsync latencies for small_file have reduced significantly. It took upto max ~5sec (worst case latency). Although this is seen in a test code, this could potentially impact the phone's performance if any application or main UI thread in Android issues fsync() in foreground while a large data transfer is going on in another context. Request you to share your thoughts and comments on this issue and the fix suggested above. Thanks, Sahitya. -- Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists