lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Feb]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/3] fuse: fix accounting background requests
From
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Maxim Patlasov <mpatlasov@parallels.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The feature was added long time ago (commit 08a53cdc...) with the comment:
>
>> A task may have at most one synchronous request allocated. So these requests
>> need not be otherwise limited.
>>
>> However the number of background requests (release, forget, asynchronous
>> reads, interrupted requests) can grow indefinitely. This can be used by a
>> malicous user to cause FUSE to allocate arbitrary amounts of unswappable
>> kernel memory, denying service.
>>
>> For this reason add a limit for the number of background requests, and block
>> allocations of new requests until the number goes bellow the limit.
>
> However, the implementation suffers from the following problems:
>
> 1. Latency of synchronous requests. As soon as fc->num_background hits the
> limit, all allocations are blocked: both for synchronous and background
> requests. This is unnecessary - as the comment cited above states, synchronous
> requests need not be limited (by fuse). Moreover, sometimes it's very
> inconvenient. For example, a dozen of tasks aggressively writing to mmap()-ed
> area may block 'ls' for long while (>1min in my experiments).
>
> 2. Thundering herd problem. When fc->num_background falls below the limit,
> request_end() calls wake_up_all(&fc->blocked_waitq). This wakes up all waiters
> while it's not impossible that the first waiter getting new request will
> immediately put it to background increasing fc->num_background again.
> (experimenting with mmap()-ed writes I observed 2x slowdown as compared with
> fuse after applying this patch-set)
>
> The patch-set re-works fuse_get_req (and its callers) to throttle only requests
> intended for background processing. Having this done, it becomes possible to
> use exclusive wakeups in chained manner: request_end() wakes up a waiter,
> the waiter allocates new request and submits it for background processing,
> the processing ends in request_end() where another wakeup happens an so on.

Thanks. These patches look okay.

But they don't apply to for-next. Can you please update them?

Thanks,
Miklos

>
> Thanks,
> Maxim
>
> ---
>
> Maxim Patlasov (3):
> fuse: make request allocations for background processing explicit
> fuse: skip blocking on allocations of synchronous requests
> fuse: implement exclusive wakeup for blocked_waitq
>
>
> fs/fuse/cuse.c | 2 +-
> fs/fuse/dev.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> fs/fuse/file.c | 5 +++--
> fs/fuse/fuse_i.h | 3 +++
> fs/fuse/inode.c | 1 +
> 5 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> --
> Signature


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-02-06 19:01    [W:0.083 / U:0.488 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site