linux-kernel - Re: RFC [PATCH2] fs/writeback: Mitigate move_expired

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5f534654a8aaa91428c2f9e188d7db7de080b9bc.camel@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 11:28:37 +0100
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: RFC [PATCH2] fs/writeback: Mitigate move_expired_inodes()
 induced service latency

(grr.. CC was supposed to be kvack)

On Thu, 2024-10-31 at 11:21 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> (was regression: mm: vmscan:  -  size XL irqoff time increase v6.10+)
> 
> 
> Break off queueing of IO after we've been at it for a ms or so and a
> preemption is due, to keep writeback latency impact at least reasonable.
> The IO we're queueing under spinlock still has to be started under that
> same lock. 
> 
> wakeup_rt tracing caught this function spanning 66ms in a i7-4790 box.
> 
> With this patch applied on top of one to mitigate even worse IRQ holdoff
> induced hits (78ms) by isolate_lru_folios(), the same trivial load that
> leads to this and worse (osc kernel package build + bonnie):
> T: 1 ( 6211) P:99 I:1500 C: 639971 Min:      1 Act:    7 Avg:   12 Max:   66696
> 
> resulted in this perfectly reasonable max:
> T: 0 ( 6078) P:99 I:1000 C:1031230 Min:      1 Act:    7 Avg:    4 Max:    4449
> 
> Note: cyclictest -Smp99 is only the messenger.  This is not an RT issue,
> RT is fingering bad generic behavior.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
> ---
>  fs/fs-writeback.c |   18 ++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
> 
> --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
> +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
>  #include <linux/tracepoint.h>
>  #include <linux/device.h>
>  #include <linux/memcontrol.h>
> +#include <linux/sched/clock.h>
>  #include "internal.h"
>  
>  /*
> @@ -1424,6 +1425,10 @@ static int move_expired_inodes(struct li
>         struct inode *inode;
>         int do_sb_sort = 0;
>         int moved = 0;
> +#ifndef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> +       u64 then = local_clock();
> +       int iter = 0;
> +#endif
>  
>         while (!list_empty(delaying_queue)) {
>                 inode = wb_inode(delaying_queue->prev);
> @@ -1439,6 +1444,19 @@ static int move_expired_inodes(struct li
>                 if (sb && sb != inode->i_sb)
>                         do_sb_sort = 1;
>                 sb = inode->i_sb;
> +#ifndef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> +               /*
> +                * We're under ->list_lock here, and the IO being queued
> +                * still has to be started. Stop queueing when we've been
> +                * at it for a ms or so and a preemption is due, to keep
> +                * latency impact reasonable.
> +                */
> +               if (iter++ < 100 || !need_resched())
> +                       continue;
> +               if (local_clock() - then > NSEC_PER_MSEC)
> +                       break;
> +               iter = 0;
> +#endif
>         }
>  
>         /* just one sb in list, splice to dispatch_queue and we're done */
>