From: Mateusz Guzik <mguzik@redhat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Yann Droneaud <ydroneaud@opteya.com>,
Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] fs: use a sequence counter instead of file_lock in fd_install
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 22:06:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150421200624.GA16097@mguzik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1429639543.7346.329.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:05:43AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-04-20 at 13:49 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Mon, 2015-04-20 at 10:15 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2015-04-20 at 17:10 +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sorry for spam but I came up with another hack. :)
> > > >
> > > > The idea is that we can have a variable which would signify the that
> > > > given thread is playing with fd table in fd_install (kind of a lock
> > > > embedded into task_struct). We would also have a flag in files struct
> > > > indicating that a thread would like to resize it.
> > > >
> > > > expand_fdtable would set the flag and iterate over all threads waiting
> > > > for all of them to have the var set to 0.
> > >
> > > The opposite : you have to block them in some way and add a rcu_sched()
> > > or something.
> >
What I described would block them, although it was a crappy approach
(iterating threads vs cpus). I was wondering if RCU could be abused for
this feature and apparently it can.
> > Here is the patch I cooked here but not yet tested.
>
> In following version :
>
> 1) I replaced the yield() hack by a proper wait queue.
>
> 2) I do not invoke synchronize_sched() for mono threaded programs.
>
> 3) I avoid multiple threads doing a resize and then only one wins the
> deal.
>
One could argue this last bit could be committed separately (a different
logical change).
As I read up about synchronize_sched and rcu_read_lock_sched, the code
should be correct.
Also see nits below.
> (copying/clearing big amount of memory only to discover another guy did
> the same is a big waste of resources)
>
>
> This seems to run properly on my hosts.
>
> Your comments/tests are most welcomed, thanks !
>
> fs/file.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> include/linux/fdtable.h | 3 ++
> 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/file.c b/fs/file.c
> index 93c5f89c248b..e0e113a56444 100644
> --- a/fs/file.c
> +++ b/fs/file.c
> @@ -147,6 +147,9 @@ static int expand_fdtable(struct files_struct *files, int nr)
>
> spin_unlock(&files->file_lock);
> new_fdt = alloc_fdtable(nr);
> + /* make sure no __fd_install() are still updating fdt */
> + if (atomic_read(&files->count) > 1)
> + synchronize_sched();
> spin_lock(&files->file_lock);
> if (!new_fdt)
> return -ENOMEM;
> @@ -170,9 +173,12 @@ static int expand_fdtable(struct files_struct *files, int nr)
> if (cur_fdt != &files->fdtab)
> call_rcu(&cur_fdt->rcu, free_fdtable_rcu);
> } else {
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
> /* Somebody else expanded, so undo our attempt */
> __free_fdtable(new_fdt);
The reader may be left confused why there is a warning while the comment
does not indicate anything is wrong.
> }
> + /* coupled with smp_rmb() in __fd_install() */
> + smp_wmb();
> return 1;
> }
>
> @@ -187,19 +193,33 @@ static int expand_fdtable(struct files_struct *files, int nr)
> static int expand_files(struct files_struct *files, int nr)
> {
> struct fdtable *fdt;
> + int expanded = 0;
>
> +begin:
> fdt = files_fdtable(files);
>
> /* Do we need to expand? */
> if (nr < fdt->max_fds)
> - return 0;
> + return expanded;
>
> /* Can we expand? */
> if (nr >= sysctl_nr_open)
> return -EMFILE;
>
> + while (unlikely(files->resize_in_progress)) {
> + spin_unlock(&files->file_lock);
> + expanded = 1;
> + wait_event(files->resize_wait, !files->resize_in_progress);
> + spin_lock(&files->file_lock);
> + goto begin;
> + }
This does not loop anymore, so s/while/if/ ?
> +
> /* All good, so we try */
> - return expand_fdtable(files, nr);
> + files->resize_in_progress = true;
> + expanded = expand_fdtable(files, nr);
> + files->resize_in_progress = false;
> + wake_up_all(&files->resize_wait);
> + return expanded;
> }
>
> static inline void __set_close_on_exec(int fd, struct fdtable *fdt)
> @@ -256,6 +276,8 @@ struct files_struct *dup_fd(struct files_struct *oldf, int *errorp)
> atomic_set(&newf->count, 1);
>
> spin_lock_init(&newf->file_lock);
> + newf->resize_in_progress = 0;
> + init_waitqueue_head(&newf->resize_wait);
> newf->next_fd = 0;
> new_fdt = &newf->fdtab;
> new_fdt->max_fds = NR_OPEN_DEFAULT;
> @@ -553,11 +575,20 @@ void __fd_install(struct files_struct *files, unsigned int fd,
> struct file *file)
> {
> struct fdtable *fdt;
> - spin_lock(&files->file_lock);
> - fdt = files_fdtable(files);
> +
> + rcu_read_lock_sched();
> +
> + while (unlikely(files->resize_in_progress)) {
> + rcu_read_unlock_sched();
> + wait_event(files->resize_wait, !files->resize_in_progress);
> + rcu_read_lock_sched();
> + }
> + /* coupled with smp_wmb() in expand_fdtable() */
> + smp_rmb();
> + fdt = READ_ONCE(files->fdt);
> BUG_ON(fdt->fd[fd] != NULL);
> rcu_assign_pointer(fdt->fd[fd], file);
> - spin_unlock(&files->file_lock);
> + rcu_read_unlock_sched();
> }
>
> void fd_install(unsigned int fd, struct file *file)
> diff --git a/include/linux/fdtable.h b/include/linux/fdtable.h
> index 230f87bdf5ad..fbb88740634a 100644
> --- a/include/linux/fdtable.h
> +++ b/include/linux/fdtable.h
> @@ -47,6 +47,9 @@ struct files_struct {
> * read mostly part
> */
> atomic_t count;
> + bool resize_in_progress;
> + wait_queue_head_t resize_wait;
> +
> struct fdtable __rcu *fdt;
> struct fdtable fdtab;
> /*
>
>
>
>
--
Mateusz Guzik
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-21 20:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-16 12:16 [RFC PATCH] fs: use a sequence counter instead of file_lock in fd_install Mateusz Guzik
2015-04-16 17:47 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-16 18:09 ` Al Viro
2015-04-16 20:42 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-16 20:55 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-16 22:00 ` Mateusz Guzik
2015-04-16 22:52 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-16 22:35 ` Mateusz Guzik
2015-04-17 21:46 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-17 22:16 ` Mateusz Guzik
2015-04-17 23:02 ` Al Viro
2015-04-18 19:41 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-20 13:41 ` Mateusz Guzik
2015-04-20 16:46 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-20 16:48 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-20 13:06 ` Mateusz Guzik
2015-04-20 13:43 ` Mateusz Guzik
2015-04-20 15:10 ` Mateusz Guzik
2015-04-20 17:15 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-20 20:49 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-21 18:05 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-21 20:06 ` Mateusz Guzik [this message]
2015-04-21 20:12 ` Mateusz Guzik
2015-04-21 21:06 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-22 4:59 ` [PATCH] fs/file.c: don't acquire files->file_lock in fd_install() Eric Dumazet
2015-04-27 19:05 ` Mateusz Guzik
2015-04-28 16:20 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-29 4:25 ` [PATCH v2] " Eric Dumazet
2015-06-22 2:32 ` Al Viro
2015-06-23 5:31 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-06-30 13:54 ` [PATCH v3] " Eric Dumazet
2015-04-22 13:31 ` [RFC PATCH] fs: use a sequence counter instead of file_lock in fd_install Mateusz Guzik
2015-04-22 13:55 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-21 20:57 ` Eric Dumazet
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=20150421200624.GA16097@mguzik \
--to=mguzik@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--cc=ydroneaud@opteya.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).