linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: readahead: remove redundant ra_pages in file_ra

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]

Date:	Wed, 24 Oct 2012 07:53:59 +0800
From:	YingHang Zhu <casualfisher@...il.com>
To:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: readahead: remove redundant ra_pages in file_ra_state

Hi Dave,
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 6:47 AM, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 08:46:51PM +0800, Ying Zhu wrote:
>> Hi,
>>   Recently we ran into the bug that an opened file's ra_pages does not
>> synchronize with it's backing device's when the latter is changed
>> with blockdev --setra, the application needs to reopen the file
>> to know the change,
>
> or simply call fadvise(fd, POSIX_FADV_NORMAL) to reset the readhead
> window to the (new) bdi default.
>
>> which is inappropriate under our circumstances.
>
> Which are? We don't know your circumstances, so you need to tell us
> why you need this and why existing methods of handling such changes
> are insufficient...
>
> Optimal readahead windows tend to be a physical property of the
> storage and that does not tend to change dynamically. Hence block
> device readahead should only need to be set up once, and generally
> that can be done before the filesystem is mounted and files are
> opened (e.g. via udev rules). Hence you need to explain why you need
> to change the default block device readahead on the fly, and why
> fadvise(POSIX_FADV_NORMAL) is "inappropriate" to set readahead
> windows to the new defaults.
Our system is a fuse-based file system, fuse creates a
pseudo backing device for the user space file systems, the default readahead
size is 128KB and it can't fully utilize the backing storage's read ability,
so we should tune it.
The above third-party application using our file system maintains
some long-opened files, we does not have any chances
to force them to call fadvise(POSIX_FADV_NORMAL). :(
Thanks,
      Ying Zhu
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
> --
> Dave Chinner
> david@...morbit.com
--
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/