From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca>
Cc: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@intel.com>,
Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/20] STAGING/lustre: limit follow_link recursion using stack space.
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 03:29:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150420020933.GI889@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150419213348.GH889@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:33:48PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 02:57:07PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
>
> > I'd be happy if symlink recursion was removed completely, but so far the
> > added symlink recursion limit hasn't been a problem for Lustre users.
>
> Well, it's gone in my tree; I've just pushed the current queue to
> vfs.git#link_path_walk. Right now I'm looking at the unholy mess
> gcc does to stack footprint with inlining - the last commit in there
> is a result of exactly that. Inlines in there really need tuning ;-/
FWIW, right now in my tree the maximal stack footprint of call chains through
fs/namei.c (amd64, my test config, including aushit) is 1408 bytes.
Goes via rename() -> renameat2() -> user_path_parent() -> filename_lookup() ->
path_lookupa() -> path_init() or follow_link() -> link_path_walk() ->
walk_component() -> lookup_fast() -> follow_managed(). And that does *not*
depend upon the depth of symlink nesting. The maximal depth when calling
any methods present in lustre is 1328; similar path, except that its tail
goes like walk_component() -> __lookup_hash() -> lookup_dcache() ->
->d_revalidate(). Again, independent from the symlink nesting depth.
->lookup() calls are at 1296 maximum, similar call chain, for ->permission()
it's 1152, for ->follow_link() - 1088.
For mainline it's _much_ worse. Maximal depth on the same config is
2986 bytes (with 8 levels of nesting) and each level costs 208 bytes.
->d_revalidate() is at 2880; for lustre it would be reduced a bit (again,
208 per level), but if you have any symlinks at all, you will end up
deeper than in non-recursive variant.
And frankly, the most scary thing in there isn't lustre-related - it's NFS4
(and AFS, etc.), where ->d_automount() might get called on _that_ depth. With
quite a bit of stack footprint of its own - we are doing NFS referral handling.
With almost 3Kb of stack already eaten up.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-20 2:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-23 2:37 [PATCH 00/20] Support follow_link in RCU-walk - V3 NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 02/20] STAGING/lustre: limit follow_link recursion using stack space NeilBrown
2015-04-18 3:01 ` Al Viro
2015-04-19 20:57 ` Andreas Dilger
2015-04-19 21:33 ` Al Viro
2015-04-20 2:29 ` Al Viro [this message]
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 03/20] VFS: replace {, total_}link_count in task_struct with pointer to nameidata NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 01/20] Documentation: remove outdated information from automount-support.txt NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 07/20] VFS: remove nameidata args from ->follow_link NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 06/20] SECURITY: remove nameidata arg from inode_follow_link NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 05/20] VFS: replace nameidata arg to ->put_link with a char* NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 11/20] VFS/namei: use terminate_walk when symlink lookup fails NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 04/20] ovl: rearrange ovl_follow_link to it doesn't need to call ->put_link NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 09/20] security/selinux: pass 'flags' arg to avc_audit() and avc_has_perm_flags() NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 08/20] VFS: make all ->follow_link handlers aware for LOOKUP_RCU NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 10/20] security: make inode_follow_link RCU-walk aware NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 12/20] VFS/namei: new flag to support RCU symlinks: LOOKUP_LINK_RCU NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 16/20] VFS/namei: enable RCU-walk when following symlinks NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 15/20] VFS/namei: enhance follow_link to support RCU-walk NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 13/20] VFS/namei: abort RCU-walk on symlink if atime needs updating NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 17/20] VFS/namei: handle LOOKUP_RCU in page_follow_link_light NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 14/20] VFS/namei: add 'inode' arg to put_link() NeilBrown
2015-04-17 16:25 ` Al Viro
2015-04-17 19:09 ` Al Viro
2015-04-18 8:09 ` Al Viro
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 18/20] xfs: use RCU to free 'struct xfs_mount' NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 19/20] XFS: allow follow_link to often succeed in RCU-walk NeilBrown
2015-03-23 2:37 ` [PATCH 20/20] NFS: support LOOKUP_RCU in nfs_follow_link NeilBrown
2015-03-25 23:23 ` [PATCH 00/20] Support follow_link in RCU-walk - V3 NeilBrown
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=20150420020933.GI889@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=adilger@dilger.ca \
--cc=andreas.dilger@intel.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=oleg.drokin@intel.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.