From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Devel"
<linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: XFS status update for May 2012
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 11:11:08 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120619011108.GF25389@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AD997E9D-2C1E-4EE4-80D7-2A5C998B6E9E@dilger.ca>
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:25:37PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On 2012-06-18, at 6:08 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > May saw the release of Linux 3.4, including a decent sized XFS update.
> > Remarkable XFS features in Linux 3.4 include moving over all metadata
> > updates to use transactions, the addition of a work queue for the
> > low-level allocator code to avoid stack overflows due to extreme stack
> > use in the Linux VM/VFS call chain,
>
> This is essentially a workaround for too-small stacks in the kernel,
> which we've had to do at times as well, by doing work in a separate
> thread (with a new stack) and waiting for the results? This is a
> generic problem that any reasonably-complex filesystem will have when
> running under memory pressure on a complex storage stack (e.g. LVM +
> iSCSI), but causes unnecessary context switching.
I've seen no performance issues from the context switching. The
overhead of them is so small to be unmeasurable most cases, because
a typical allocation already requires context switches for contended
locks and metadata IO....
> Any thoughts on a better way to handle this, or will there continue
> to be a 4kB stack limit
We were blowing 8k stacks on x86-64 with alarming ease. Even the
flusher threads were overflowing.
> and hack around this with repeated kmalloc
> on callpaths for any struct over a few tens of bytes, implementing
> memory pools all over the place, and "forking" over to other threads
> to continue the stack consumption for another 4kB to work around
> the small stack limit?
I mentioned that we needed to consider 16k stacks at last years
Kernel Summit and the response was along the lines of "you've got to
be kidding - fix your broken filesystem". That's the perception you
have to change, and i don't feel like having a 4k stacks battle
again...
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
xfs@oss.sgi.com,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Devel"
<linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: XFS status update for May 2012
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 11:11:08 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120619011108.GF25389@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AD997E9D-2C1E-4EE4-80D7-2A5C998B6E9E@dilger.ca>
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:25:37PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On 2012-06-18, at 6:08 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > May saw the release of Linux 3.4, including a decent sized XFS update.
> > Remarkable XFS features in Linux 3.4 include moving over all metadata
> > updates to use transactions, the addition of a work queue for the
> > low-level allocator code to avoid stack overflows due to extreme stack
> > use in the Linux VM/VFS call chain,
>
> This is essentially a workaround for too-small stacks in the kernel,
> which we've had to do at times as well, by doing work in a separate
> thread (with a new stack) and waiting for the results? This is a
> generic problem that any reasonably-complex filesystem will have when
> running under memory pressure on a complex storage stack (e.g. LVM +
> iSCSI), but causes unnecessary context switching.
I've seen no performance issues from the context switching. The
overhead of them is so small to be unmeasurable most cases, because
a typical allocation already requires context switches for contended
locks and metadata IO....
> Any thoughts on a better way to handle this, or will there continue
> to be a 4kB stack limit
We were blowing 8k stacks on x86-64 with alarming ease. Even the
flusher threads were overflowing.
> and hack around this with repeated kmalloc
> on callpaths for any struct over a few tens of bytes, implementing
> memory pools all over the place, and "forking" over to other threads
> to continue the stack consumption for another 4kB to work around
> the small stack limit?
I mentioned that we needed to consider 16k stacks at last years
Kernel Summit and the response was along the lines of "you've got to
be kidding - fix your broken filesystem". That's the perception you
have to change, and i don't feel like having a 4k stacks battle
again...
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-19 1:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-18 12:08 XFS status update for May 2012 Christoph Hellwig
2012-06-18 12:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-06-18 18:25 ` Andreas Dilger
2012-06-18 18:25 ` Andreas Dilger
2012-06-18 18:43 ` Ben Myers
2012-06-18 18:43 ` Ben Myers
2012-06-18 20:36 ` Andreas Dilger
2012-06-18 20:36 ` Andreas Dilger
2012-06-19 1:20 ` Dave Chinner
2012-06-19 1:20 ` Dave Chinner
2012-06-18 21:11 ` Eric Sandeen
2012-06-18 21:11 ` Eric Sandeen
2012-06-18 21:16 ` Eric Sandeen
2012-06-18 21:16 ` Eric Sandeen
2012-06-19 1:27 ` Dave Chinner
2012-06-19 1:27 ` Dave Chinner
2012-06-19 1:11 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2012-06-19 1:11 ` Dave Chinner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120619011108.GF25389@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=adilger@dilger.ca \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.