linux-kernel - Re: [ext3][kernels >= 2.6.20.7 at least] KDE going comatose when FS is under heavy write load (massive starvation)

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070428163740.GA17061@elte.hu>
Date:	Sat, 28 Apr 2007 18:37:40 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Mikulas Patocka <mikulas@...ax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [ext3][kernels >= 2.6.20.7 at least] KDE going comatose when FS is under heavy write load (massive starvation)

* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> Even with a good software IO scheduler, when you have disks that do 
> tagged queueing, if you fill up the disk queue with a few dozen 
> (depends on the disk what the queue limit is) huge write requests, it 
> doesn't really matter if the _software_ queuing then gives a big 
> advantage to reads coming in. They'll _still_ be waiting for a long 
> time, especially since you don't know what the disk firmware is going 
> to do.

by far the largest advantage of tagged queueing is when we go from 1 
pending request to 2 pending requests. The rest helps too for certain 
workloads (especially benchmarks), but if the IRQ handling is fast 
enough, having just 2 is more than enough to get 80% of the advantage of 
say of hardware-queue with a depth of 64.

So perhaps if there's any privileged reads going on then we should limit 
writes to a depth of 2 at most, with some timeout mechanism that would 
gradually allow the deepening of the hardware queue, as long as no 
highprio reads come inbetween? With 2 pending requests and even assuming 
worst-case seeks the user-visible latency would be on the order of 20-30 
msecs, which is at the edge of human perception. The problem comes when 
a hardware queue of 32-64 entries starves that one highprio read which 
then results in a 2+ seconds latency.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/