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: <Z23Ptl5cAnIiKx6W@dread.disaster.area>
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2024 08:50:46 +1100
From: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To: Chi Zhiling <chizhiling@....com>
Cc: djwong@...nel.org, cem@...nel.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Chi Zhiling <chizhiling@...inos.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: Remove i_rwsem lock in buffered read

On Thu, Dec 26, 2024 at 02:16:02PM +0800, Chi Zhiling wrote:
> From: Chi Zhiling <chizhiling@...inos.cn>
> 
> Using an rwsem to protect file data ensures that we can always obtain a
> completed modification. But due to the lock, we need to wait for the
> write process to release the rwsem before we can read it, even if we are
> reading a different region of the file. This could take a lot of time
> when many processes need to write and read this file.
> 
> On the other hand, The ext4 filesystem and others do not hold the lock
> during buffered reading, which make the ext4 have better performance in
> that case. Therefore, I think it will be fine if we remove the lock in
> xfs, as most applications can handle this situation.

Nope.

This means that XFS loses high level serialisation of incoming IO
against operations like truncate, fallocate, pnfs operations, etc.

We've been through this multiple times before; the solution lies in
doing the work to make buffered writes use shared locking, not
removing shared locking from buffered reads.

A couple of old discussions from the list:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/CAOQ4uxi0pGczXBX7GRAFs88Uw0n1ERJZno3JSeZR71S1dXg+2w@mail.gmail.com/
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20190404165737.30889-1-amir73il@gmail.com/

There are likely others - you can search for them yourself to get
more background information.

Fundamentally, though, removing locking from the read side is not
the answer to this buffered write IO exclusion problem....

-Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ