netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 15/32] NFSD: Leave open files out of the filecache LRU

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: <BC4E1A0C-1404-4C50-ADD0-3999DEE01066@oracle.com>
Date:   Sat, 9 Jul 2022 20:45:05 +0000
From:   Chuck Lever III <chuck.lever@...cle.com>
To:     Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
CC:     Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "david@...morbit.com" <david@...morbit.com>,
        "tgraf@...g.ch" <tgraf@...g.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 15/32] NFSD: Leave open files out of the filecache LRU



> On Jul 8, 2022, at 3:29 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 2022-07-08 at 14:25 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
>> There have been reports of problems when running fstests generic/531
>> against Linux NFS servers with NFSv4. The NFS server that hosts the
>> test's SCRATCH_DEV suffers from CPU soft lock-ups during the test.
>> Analysis shows that:
>> 
>> fs/nfsd/filecache.c
>> 482 ret = list_lru_walk(&nfsd_file_lru,
>> 483 nfsd_file_lru_cb,
>> 484 &head, LONG_MAX);
>> 
>> causes nfsd_file_gc() to walk the entire length of the filecache LRU
>> list every time it is called (which is quite frequently). The walk
>> holds a spinlock the entire time that prevents other nfsd threads
>> from accessing the filecache.
>> 
>> What's more, for NFSv4 workloads, none of the items that are visited
>> during this walk may be evicted, since they are all files that are
>> held OPEN by NFS clients.
>> 
>> Address this by ensuring that open files are not kept on the LRU
>> list.
>> 
>> Reported-by: Frank van der Linden <fllinden@...zon.com>
>> Reported-by: Wang Yugui <wangyugui@...-tech.com>
>> Link: https://bugzilla.linux-nfs.org/show_bug.cgi?id=386
>> Suggested-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...merspace.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>
>> ---
>> fs/nfsd/filecache.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++-----
>> fs/nfsd/trace.h | 2 ++
>> 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/filecache.c b/fs/nfsd/filecache.c
>> index 37373b012276..6e9e186334ab 100644
>> --- a/fs/nfsd/filecache.c
>> +++ b/fs/nfsd/filecache.c
>> @@ -269,6 +269,7 @@ nfsd_file_flush(struct nfsd_file *nf)
>> 
>> static void nfsd_file_lru_add(struct nfsd_file *nf)
>> {
>> +	set_bit(NFSD_FILE_REFERENCED, &nf->nf_flags);
>> 	if (list_lru_add(&nfsd_file_lru, &nf->nf_lru))
>> 		trace_nfsd_file_lru_add(nf);
>> }
>> @@ -298,7 +299,6 @@ nfsd_file_unhash(struct nfsd_file *nf)
>> {
>> 	if (test_and_clear_bit(NFSD_FILE_HASHED, &nf->nf_flags)) {
>> 		nfsd_file_do_unhash(nf);
>> -		nfsd_file_lru_remove(nf);
>> 		return true;
>> 	}
>> 	return false;
>> @@ -319,6 +319,7 @@ nfsd_file_unhash_and_release_locked(struct nfsd_file *nf, struct list_head *disp
>> 	if (refcount_dec_not_one(&nf->nf_ref))
>> 		return true;
>> 
>> +	nfsd_file_lru_remove(nf);
>> 	list_add(&nf->nf_lru, dispose);
>> 	return true;
>> }
>> @@ -330,6 +331,7 @@ nfsd_file_put_noref(struct nfsd_file *nf)
>> 
>> 	if (refcount_dec_and_test(&nf->nf_ref)) {
>> 		WARN_ON(test_bit(NFSD_FILE_HASHED, &nf->nf_flags));
>> +		nfsd_file_lru_remove(nf);
>> 		nfsd_file_free(nf);
>> 	}
>> }
>> @@ -339,7 +341,7 @@ nfsd_file_put(struct nfsd_file *nf)
>> {
>> 	might_sleep();
>> 
>> -	set_bit(NFSD_FILE_REFERENCED, &nf->nf_flags);
>> +	nfsd_file_lru_add(nf);
> 
> Do you really want to add this on every put? I would have thought you'd
> only want to do this on a 2->1 nf_ref transition.

My measurements indicate that 2->1 is the common case, so checking
that this is /not/ a 2->1 transition doesn't confer much if any
benefit.

Under load, I don't see any contention on the LRU locks, which is
where I'd expect to see a problem if this design were not efficient.


>> 	if (test_bit(NFSD_FILE_HASHED, &nf->nf_flags) == 0) {
>> 		nfsd_file_flush(nf);
>> 		nfsd_file_put_noref(nf);
>> @@ -439,8 +441,18 @@ nfsd_file_dispose_list_delayed(struct list_head *dispose)
>> 	}
>> }
>> 
>> -/*
>> +/**
>> + * nfsd_file_lru_cb - Examine an entry on the LRU list
>> + * @item: LRU entry to examine
>> + * @lru: controlling LRU
>> + * @lock: LRU list lock (unused)
>> + * @arg: dispose list
>> + *
>> * Note this can deadlock with nfsd_file_cache_purge.
>> + *
>> + * Return values:
>> + * %LRU_REMOVED: @item was removed from the LRU
>> + * %LRU_SKIP: @item cannot be evicted
>> */
>> static enum lru_status
>> nfsd_file_lru_cb(struct list_head *item, struct list_lru_one *lru,
>> @@ -462,8 +474,9 @@ nfsd_file_lru_cb(struct list_head *item, struct list_lru_one *lru,
>> 	 * That order is deliberate to ensure that we can do this locklessly.
>> 	 */
>> 	if (refcount_read(&nf->nf_ref) > 1) {
>> +		list_lru_isolate(lru, &nf->nf_lru);
>> 		trace_nfsd_file_gc_in_use(nf);
>> -		return LRU_SKIP;
>> +		return LRU_REMOVED;
> 
> Interesting. So you wait until the LRU scanner runs to remove these
> entries? I expected to see you do this in nfsd_file_get, but this does
> seem likely to be more efficient.
> 
>> 	}
>> 
>> 	/*
>> @@ -1020,6 +1033,7 @@ nfsd_do_file_acquire(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct svc_fh *fhp,
>> 		goto retry;
>> 	}
>> 
>> +	nfsd_file_lru_remove(nf);
>> 	this_cpu_inc(nfsd_file_cache_hits);
>> 
>> 	if (!(may_flags & NFSD_MAY_NOT_BREAK_LEASE)) {
>> @@ -1055,7 +1069,6 @@ nfsd_do_file_acquire(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct svc_fh *fhp,
>> 	refcount_inc(&nf->nf_ref);
>> 	__set_bit(NFSD_FILE_HASHED, &nf->nf_flags);
>> 	__set_bit(NFSD_FILE_PENDING, &nf->nf_flags);
>> -	nfsd_file_lru_add(nf);
>> 	hlist_add_head_rcu(&nf->nf_node, &nfsd_file_hashtbl[hashval].nfb_head);
>> 	++nfsd_file_hashtbl[hashval].nfb_count;
>> 	nfsd_file_hashtbl[hashval].nfb_maxcount = max(nfsd_file_hashtbl[hashval].nfb_maxcount,
>> @@ -1080,6 +1093,7 @@ nfsd_do_file_acquire(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct svc_fh *fhp,
>> 	 */
>> 	if (status != nfs_ok || inode->i_nlink == 0) {
>> 		bool do_free;
>> +		nfsd_file_lru_remove(nf);
>> 		spin_lock(&nfsd_file_hashtbl[hashval].nfb_lock);
>> 		do_free = nfsd_file_unhash(nf);
>> 		spin_unlock(&nfsd_file_hashtbl[hashval].nfb_lock);
>> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/trace.h b/fs/nfsd/trace.h
>> index 1cc1133371eb..54082b868b72 100644
>> --- a/fs/nfsd/trace.h
>> +++ b/fs/nfsd/trace.h
>> @@ -929,7 +929,9 @@ DEFINE_EVENT(nfsd_file_gc_class, name,					\
>> 	TP_ARGS(nf))
>> 
>> DEFINE_NFSD_FILE_GC_EVENT(nfsd_file_lru_add);
>> +DEFINE_NFSD_FILE_GC_EVENT(nfsd_file_lru_add_disposed);
>> DEFINE_NFSD_FILE_GC_EVENT(nfsd_file_lru_del);
>> +DEFINE_NFSD_FILE_GC_EVENT(nfsd_file_lru_del_disposed);
>> DEFINE_NFSD_FILE_GC_EVENT(nfsd_file_gc_in_use);
>> DEFINE_NFSD_FILE_GC_EVENT(nfsd_file_gc_writeback);
>> DEFINE_NFSD_FILE_GC_EVENT(nfsd_file_gc_referenced);
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>

--
Chuck Lever