linux-kernel - Re: [00/41] Large Blocksize Support V7 (adds memmap support)

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: <20070923174402.GA15525@lazybastard.org>
Date:	Sun, 23 Sep 2007 19:44:03 +0200
From:	Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...e.de>,
	Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@...ormatik.uni-tuebingen.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Mel Gorman <mel@...net.ie>,
	William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>,
	David Chinner <dgc@....com>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@...il.com>,
	Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...il.com>,
	Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...il.com>,
	swin wang <wangswin@...il.com>, totty.lu@...il.com,
	hugh@...itas.com
Subject: Re: [00/41] Large Blocksize Support V7 (adds memmap support)

On Sun, 16 September 2007 11:44:09 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Sep 2007, Jörn Engel wrote:
> > 
> > My approach is to have one for mount points and ramfs/tmpfs/sysfs/etc.
> > which are pinned for their entire lifetime and another for regular
> > files/inodes.  One could take a three-way approach and have
> > always-pinned, often-pinned and rarely-pinned.
> > 
> > We won't get never-pinned that way.
> 
> That sounds pretty good. The problem, of course, is that most of the time, 
> the actual dentry allocation itself is done before you really know which 
> case the dentry will be in, and the natural place for actually giving the 
> dentry lifetime hint is *not* at "d_alloc()", but when we "instantiate" 
> it with d_add() or d_instantiate().
> 
> [...]
> 
> And yes, you'd end up with the reallocation overhead quite often, but at 
> least it would now happen only when filling in a dentry, not in the 
> (*much* more critical) cached lookup path.

There may be another approach.  We could create a never-pinned cache,
without trying hard to keep it full.  Instead of moving a hot dentry at
dput() time, we move a cold one from the end of lru.  And if the lru
list is short, we just chicken out.

Our definition of "short lru list" can either be based on a ratio of
pinned to unpinned dentries or on a metric of cache hits vs. cache
misses.  I tend to dislike the cache hit metric, because updatedb would
cause tons of misses and result in the same mess we have right now.

With this double cache, we have a source of slabs to cheaply reap under
memory pressure, but still have a performance advantage (memcpy beats
disk io by orders of magnitude).

Jörn

-- 
The story so far:
In the beginning the Universe was created.  This has made a lot
of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
-- Douglas Adams
-
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/