linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cfq: Fix starvation of async writes in presence of heavy sync workload

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: <BANLkTike3ZhFR9HioPcQWzwXYhszo0-SkA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 21 Jun 2011 10:15:15 +0800
From:	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
To:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Tao Ma <tm@....ma>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cfq: Fix starvation of async writes in presence of heavy
 sync workload

2011/6/20 Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>:
> In presence of heavy sync workload CFQ can starve asnc writes.
> If one launches multiple readers (say 16), then one can notice
> that CFQ can withhold dispatch of WRITEs for a very long time say
> 200 or 300 seconds.
>
> Basically CFQ schedules an async queue but does not dispatch any
> writes because it is waiting for exisintng sync requests in queue to
> finish. While it is waiting, one or other reader gets queued up and
> preempts the async queue. So we did schedule the async queue but never
> dispatched anything from it. This can repeat for long time hence
> practically starving Writers.
>
> This patch allows async queue to dispatch atleast 1 requeust once
> it gets scheduled and denies preemption if async queue has been
> waiting for sync requests to drain and has not been able to dispatch
> a request yet.
>
> One concern with this fix is that how does it impact readers
> in presence of heavy writting going on.
>
> I did a test where I launch firefox, load a website and close
> firefox and measure the time. I ran the test 3 times and took
> average.
>
> - Vanilla kernel time ~= 1 minute 40 seconds
> - Patched kenrel time ~= 1 minute 35 seconds
>
> Basically it looks like that for this test times have not
> changed much for this test. But I would not claim that it does
> not impact reader's latencies at all. It might show up in
> other workloads.
>
> I think we anyway need to fix writer starvation. If this patch
> causes issues, then we need to look at reducing writer's
> queue depth further to improve latencies for readers.
I'm afraid this can causes read latency because cfq_dispatch_requests
doesn't check preempt. we will dispatch 4 requests at least instead of
just one. can we add a logic to force it just dispatches one request?

Thanks,
Shaohua
--
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/