All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Maxim V. Patlasov" <mpatlasov@parallels.com>
To: <lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"
	<fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [ATTEND][LSF/MM TOPIC] FUSE: write-back cache policy and other improvements
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 16:19:10 +0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <512F4B3E.6030409@parallels.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <511BAC51.4030309@parallels.com>

Adding linux-mm to cc:. One more point to discuss:

* balance_dirty_pages(): should we account NR_WRITEBACK_TEMP there? 
Currently, any FUSE user may consume arbitrary amount of RAM (stuck in 
kernel FUSE writeback) by intensive write to a huge mmap-ed area.

02/13/2013 07:08 PM, Maxim V. Patlasov пишет:
> Hi,
>
> I'm interested in attending to discuss the latest advances in 
> accelerating FUSE and making it more friendly to distributed 
> file-systems. I'd like to propose and participate in the following 
> discussions in the upcoming LSF/MM:
>
> * write-back cache policy: one of the problems with the existing FUSE 
> implementation is that it uses the write-through cache policy which 
> results in performance problems on certain workloads. A good solution 
> of this is switching the FUSE page cache into a write-back policy. 
> With this file data are pushed to the userspace with big chunks which 
> lets the FUSE daemons handle requests in a more efficient manner.
>
> * optimize scatter-gather direct IO: dio performance can be improved 
> significantly by stuffing many io-vectors  into a single fuse request. 
> This is especially the case for device virtualization thread 
> performing i/o on behalf of virtual-machine it serves.
>
> * process direct IO asynchronously: both AIO and ordinary synchronous 
> direct IO can be boosted by submitting fuse requests in non-blocking 
> way (where it's possible) and either returning -EIOCBQUEUED or waiting 
> for their completions synchronously.
>
> * synchronous close(2): currently, in-kernel fuse sends release 
> request to userspace and returns without waiting for ACK from 
> userspace. Consequently, there is a gap when user regards the file 
> released while userspace fuse is still working on it. This leads to 
> unnecessary synchronization complications for file-systems with shared 
> access. That behaviour can be fixed by making close(2) synchronous.
>
> * throttle request allocations: currently, in-kernel fuse throttles 
> allocations of all fuse requests. Switching to the policy where only 
> background requests are throttled would improve the latency of 
> synchronous requests and resolve thundering herd problem of waking up 
> all threads blocked on fuse request allocations.
>
> Thanks,
> Maxim
>
>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Maxim V. Patlasov" <mpatlasov@parallels.com>
To: lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org
Cc: "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"
	<fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [ATTEND][LSF/MM TOPIC] FUSE: write-back cache policy and other improvements
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 16:19:10 +0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <512F4B3E.6030409@parallels.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <511BAC51.4030309@parallels.com>

Adding linux-mm to cc:. One more point to discuss:

* balance_dirty_pages(): should we account NR_WRITEBACK_TEMP there? 
Currently, any FUSE user may consume arbitrary amount of RAM (stuck in 
kernel FUSE writeback) by intensive write to a huge mmap-ed area.

02/13/2013 07:08 PM, Maxim V. Patlasov D?D,N?DuN?:
> Hi,
>
> I'm interested in attending to discuss the latest advances in 
> accelerating FUSE and making it more friendly to distributed 
> file-systems. I'd like to propose and participate in the following 
> discussions in the upcoming LSF/MM:
>
> * write-back cache policy: one of the problems with the existing FUSE 
> implementation is that it uses the write-through cache policy which 
> results in performance problems on certain workloads. A good solution 
> of this is switching the FUSE page cache into a write-back policy. 
> With this file data are pushed to the userspace with big chunks which 
> lets the FUSE daemons handle requests in a more efficient manner.
>
> * optimize scatter-gather direct IO: dio performance can be improved 
> significantly by stuffing many io-vectors  into a single fuse request. 
> This is especially the case for device virtualization thread 
> performing i/o on behalf of virtual-machine it serves.
>
> * process direct IO asynchronously: both AIO and ordinary synchronous 
> direct IO can be boosted by submitting fuse requests in non-blocking 
> way (where it's possible) and either returning -EIOCBQUEUED or waiting 
> for their completions synchronously.
>
> * synchronous close(2): currently, in-kernel fuse sends release 
> request to userspace and returns without waiting for ACK from 
> userspace. Consequently, there is a gap when user regards the file 
> released while userspace fuse is still working on it. This leads to 
> unnecessary synchronization complications for file-systems with shared 
> access. That behaviour can be fixed by making close(2) synchronous.
>
> * throttle request allocations: currently, in-kernel fuse throttles 
> allocations of all fuse requests. Switching to the policy where only 
> background requests are throttled would improve the latency of 
> synchronous requests and resolve thundering herd problem of waking up 
> all threads blocked on fuse request allocations.
>
> Thanks,
> Maxim
>
>

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2013-02-28 12:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-02-13 15:08 [ATTEND][LSF/MM TOPIC] FUSE: write-back cache policy and other improvements Maxim V. Patlasov
2013-02-28 12:19 ` Maxim V. Patlasov [this message]
2013-02-28 12:19   ` Maxim V. Patlasov

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=512F4B3E.6030409@parallels.com \
    --to=mpatlasov@parallels.com \
    --cc=fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    /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.