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  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:   Thu, 30 Aug 2018 09:20:56 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc:     Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Larry Woodman <lwoodman@...hat.com>,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
        "Wangkai (Kevin C)" <wangkai86@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] fs/dcache: Make negative dentries easier to be
 reclaimed

On Wed 29-08-18 15:58:52, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 08/29/2018 03:51 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 28-08-18 13:19:40, Waiman Long wrote:
> >> For negative dentries that are accessed once and never used again, they
> >> should be removed first before other dentries when shrinker is running.
> >> This is done by putting negative dentries at the head of the LRU list
> >> instead at the tail.
> >>
> >> A new DCACHE_NEW_NEGATIVE flag is now added to a negative dentry when it
> >> is initially created. When such a dentry is added to the LRU, it will be
> >> added to the head so that it will be the first to go when a shrinker is
> >> running if it is never accessed again (DCACHE_REFERENCED bit not set).
> >> The flag is cleared after the LRU list addition.
> > Placing object to the head of the LRU list can be really tricky as Dave
> > pointed out. I am not familiar with the dentry cache reclaim so my
> > comparison below might not apply. Let me try anyway.
> >
> > Negative dentries sound very similar to MADV_FREE pages from the reclaim
> > POV. They are primary candidate for reclaim, yet you want to preserve
> > aging to other easily reclaimable objects (including other MADV_FREE
> > pages). What we do for those pages is to move them from the anonymous
> > LRU list to the inactive file LRU list. Now you obviously do not have
> > anon/file LRUs but something similar to active/inactive LRU lists might
> > be a reasonably good match. Have easily reclaimable dentries on the
> > inactive list including negative dentries. If negative entries are
> > heavily used then they can promote to the active list because there is
> > no reason to reclaim them soon.
> >
> > Just my 2c
> 
> As mentioned in my reply to Dave, I did considered using a 2 LRU list
> solution. However, that will add more complexity to the dcache LRU
> management code than my current approach and probably more potential for
> slowdown.

I completely agree with Dave here. This is not easy but trying to sneak
in something that works for an _artificial_ workload is simply a no go.
So if it takes to come with a more complex solution to cover more
general workloads then be it. Someone has to bite a bullet and explore
that direction. It won't be a simple project but well, if negative
dentries really matter then it is worth making the reclaim design robust
and comprehensible rather than adhoc and unpredictable.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

Powered by blists - more mailing lists