From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/6] fs/dcache: Limit # of negative dentries
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Larry Woodman <lwoodman@redhat.com>,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
        "Wangkai (Kevin C)" <wangkai86@huawei.com>
References: <1505758834-1201-1-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com>
 <20171010155439.d8f4bc552a81290fd5bec8cd@linux-foundation.org>
From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <41d8db7e-4538-aaaf-6d65-574b5c0ffd7a@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 16:47:05 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20171010155439.d8f4bc552a81290fd5bec8cd@linux-foundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

On 10/10/2017 06:54 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 14:20:28 -0400 Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> A rogue application can potentially create a large number of negative
>> dentries in the system consuming most of the memory available even if
>> memory controller is enabled to limit memory usage. This can impact
>> performance of other applications running on the system.
> It does seem that under these circumstances it is pretty silly of us to
> reclaim useful things in order to instantiate zillions of -ve dentries.

I am talking about a misbehaving program due to bug or an intentional
rogue program.

>
> Dentries are subject to kmemcg handling.  Does this not help avoid
> "impacting performance of other applications"?

AFAIK, the dentry kmem_cache isn't memcg aware. So memcg can't really
constrain the dentry allocation.

>> We have customers seeing soft lockup and unresponsive system when
>> tearing down a container because of the large number of negative
>> dentries accumulated during its up time that had to be cleaned up at
>> exit time when the container's filesystem was unmounted. So we need
>> to do something about it.
> It's a somewhat separate issue, but maybe we're missing a cond_resched
> somewhere?  Seeing such a softlockup's output would help.
>
I don't have a console log. I got this information indirectly via some
of our customer-facing engineers.

Cheers,
Longman