netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC 29/30] NFSD: Convert the filecache to use rhashtable

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: <EDD9404B-ACBA-4284-8AFC-8AB4536481A3@oracle.com>
Date:   Thu, 23 Jun 2022 23:59:45 +0000
From:   Chuck Lever III <chuck.lever@...cle.com>
To:     Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
CC:     Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "tgraf@...g.ch" <tgraf@...g.ch>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 29/30] NFSD: Convert the filecache to use rhashtable



> On Jun 23, 2022, at 6:33 PM, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 05:27:20PM +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote:
>> Also I just found Neil's nice rhashtable explainer:
>> 
>>   https://lwn.net/Articles/751374/
>> 
>> Where he writes that:
>> 
>>> Sometimes you might want a hash table to potentially contain
>>> multiple objects for any given key. In that case you can use
>>> "rhltables" — rhashtables with lists of objects.
>> 
>> I believe that is the case for the filecache. The hash value is
>> computed based on the inode pointer, and therefore there can be more
>> than one nfsd_file object for a particular inode (depending on who
>> is opening and for what access). So I think filecache needs to use
>> rhltable, not rhashtable. Any thoughts from rhashtable experts?
> 
> Huh, I assumed the file cache was just hashing the whole key so that
> every object in the rht has it's own unique key and hash and there's
> no need to handle multiple objects per key...
> 
> What are you trying to optimise by hashing only the inode *pointer*
> in the nfsd_file object keyspace?

Well, this design is inherited from the current filecache
implementation.

It assumes that all nfsd_file objects that refer to the same
inode will always get chained into the same bucket. That way:

 506 static void
 507 __nfsd_file_close_inode(struct inode *inode, unsigned int hashval,
 508                         struct list_head *dispose)
 509 {
 510         struct nfsd_file        *nf;
 511         struct hlist_node       *tmp;
 512 
 513         spin_lock(&nfsd_file_hashtbl[hashval].nfb_lock);
 514         hlist_for_each_entry_safe(nf, tmp, &nfsd_file_hashtbl[hashval].nfb_head, nf_node) {
 515                 if (inode == nf->nf_inode)
 516                         nfsd_file_unhash_and_release_locked(nf, dispose);
 517         }
 518         spin_unlock(&nfsd_file_hashtbl[hashval].nfb_lock);
 519 }

nfsd_file_close_inode() can lock one hash bucket and just
walk that hash chain to find all the nfsd_file's associated
with a particular in-core inode.

Actually I don't think there's any other reason to keep that
hashing design, but Jeff can confirm that.

So I guess we could use rhltable and keep the nfsd_file items
for the same inode on the same hash list? I'm not sure it's
worth the trouble: this part of filecache isn't really on the
hot path.


--
Chuck Lever