linux-kernel - Re: contention on pwq->pool->lock under heavy NFS 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]

Date:   Thu, 22 Jun 2023 15:45:18 +0000
From:   Chuck Lever III <chuck.lever@...cle.com>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
CC:     open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: contention on pwq->pool->lock under heavy NFS workload



> On Jun 21, 2023, at 5:28 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 03:26:22PM +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote:
>> lock_stat reports that the pool->lock kernel/workqueue.c:1483 is the highest
>> contended lock on my test NFS client. The issue appears to be that the three
>> NFS-related workqueues, rpciod_workqueue, xprtiod_workqueue, and nfsiod all
>> get placed in the same worker_pool, so they have to fight over one pool lock.
>> 
>> I notice that ib_comp_wq is allocated with the same flags, but I don't see
>> significant contention there, and a trace_printk in __queue_work shows that
>> work items queued on that WQ seem to alternate between at least two different
>> worker_pools.
>> 
>> Is there a preferred way to ensure the NFS WQs get spread a little more fairly
>> amongst the worker_pools?
> 
> Can you share the output of lstopo on the test machine?
> 
> The following branch has pending workqueue changes which makes unbound
> workqueues finer grained by default and a lot more flexible in how they're
> segmented.
> 
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/wq.git affinity-scopes-v2
> 
> Can you please test with the brnach? If the default doesn't improve the
> situation, you can set WQ_SYSFS on the affected workqueues and change their
> scoping by writing to /sys/devices/virtual/WQ_NAME/affinity_scope. Please
> take a look at
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/wq.git/tree/Documentation/core-api/workqueue.rst?h=affinity-scopes-v2#n350
> 
> for more details.

The good news:

On stock 6.4-rc7:

fio 8k [r=108k,w=46.9k IOPS]

On the affinity-scopes-v2 branch (with no other tuning):

fio 8k [r=130k,w=55.9k IOPS]


The bad news:

pool->lock is still the hottest lock on the system during the test.


I'll try some of the alternate scope settings this afternoon.


--
Chuck Lever