Re: [PATCH RFC 0/8] dcache: increase poison resistance

Konstantin Khlebnikov
2020-12-12T07:32:50Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5817 bytes --]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 2:01 AM Junxiao Bi <junxiao.bi@oracle.com> wrote:

> Hi Konstantin,
>
> We tested this patch set recently and found it limiting negative dentry
> to a small part of total memory. And also we don't see any performance
> regression on it. Do you have any plan to integrate it into mainline? It
> will help a lot on memory fragmentation issue causing by dentry slab,
> there were a lot of customer cases where sys% was very high since most
> cpu were doing memory compaction, dentry slab was taking too much memory
> and nearly all dentry there were negative.
>

Right now I don't have any plans for this. I suspect such problems will
appear much more often since machines are getting bigger.
So, somebody will take care of it.

First part which collects negative dentries at the end list of siblings
could be
done in a more obvious way by splitting the list in two.
But this touches much more code.

Last patch isn't very rigid but does non-trivial changes.
Probably it's better to call some garbage collector thingy periodically.
Lru list needs pressure to age and reorder entries properly.

Gc could be off by default or thresholds set very high (50% of ram for
example).
Final setup could be left up to owners of large systems, which needs fine
tuning.

>
> The following is test result we run on two types of servers, one is 256G
> memory with 24 CPUS and another is 3T memory with 384 CPUS. The test
> case is using a lot of processes to generate negative dentry in
> parallel, the following is the test result after 72 hours, the negative
> dentry number is stable around that number even running longer time. If
> without the patch set, in less than half an hour 197G was took by
> negative dentry on 256G system, in 1 day 2.4T was took on 3T system.
>
> neg-dentry-number neg-dentry-mem-usage
>
> 256G 55259084 10.6G
>
> 3T 202306756 38.8G
>
> For perf test, we run the following, and no regression found.
>
> - create 1M negative dentry and then touch them to convert them to
> positive dentry
>
> - create 10K/100K/1M files
>
> - remove 10K/100K/1M files
>
> - kernel compile
>
> To verify the fsnotify fix, we used inotifywait to watch file
> create/open in some directory where there is a lot of negative dentry,
> without the patch set, the system will run into soft lockup, with it, no
> soft lockup.
>
> We also try to defeat the limitation by making different processes
> generating negative dentry with the same naming way, that will make one
> negative dentry being accessed couple times around same time,
> DCACHE_REFERENCED will be set on it and then it can't be trimmed easily.
> We do see negative dentry will take all the memory slowly from one of
> our system with 120G memory, for above two system, we see the memory
> usage were increased, but still a small part of total memory. This looks
> ok, since the common negative dentry user case will be create some temp
> files and then remove it, it will be rare to access same negative dentry
> around same time.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Junxiao.
>
>
> On 5/8/20 5:23 AM, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> > For most filesystems result of every negative lookup is cached, content
> of
> > directories is usually cached too. Production of negative dentries isn't
> > limited with disk speed. It's really easy to generate millions of them if
> > system has enough memory.
> >
> > Getting this memory back ins't that easy because slab frees pages only
> when
> > all related objects are gone. While dcache shrinker works in LRU order.
> >
> > Typical scenario is an idle system where some process periodically
> creates
> > temporary files and removes them. After some time, memory will be filled
> > with negative dentries for these random file names.
> >
> > Simple lookup of random names also generates negative dentries very fast.
> > Constant flow of such negative denries drains all other inactive caches.
> >
> > Negative dentries are linked into siblings list along with normal
> positive
> > dentries. Some operations walks dcache tree but looks only for positive
> > dentries: most important is fsnotify/inotify. Hordes of negative dentries
> > slow down these operations significantly.
> >
> > Time of dentry lookup is usually unaffected because hash table grows
> along
> > with size of memory. Unless somebody especially crafts hash collisions.
> >
> > This patch set solves all of these problems:
> >
> > Move negative denries to the end of sliblings list, thus walkers could
> > skip them at first sight (patches 3-6).
> >
> > Keep in dcache at most three unreferenced negative denties in row in each
> > hash bucket (patches 7-8).
> >
> > ---
> >
> > Konstantin Khlebnikov (8):
> > dcache: show count of hash buckets in sysctl fs.dentry-state
> > selftests: add stress testing tool for dcache
> > dcache: sweep cached negative dentries to the end of list of
> siblings
> > fsnotify: stop walking child dentries if remaining tail is
> negative
> > dcache: add action D_WALK_SKIP_SIBLINGS to d_walk()
> > dcache: stop walking siblings if remaining dentries all negative
> > dcache: push releasing dentry lock into sweep_negative
> > dcache: prevent flooding with negative dentries
> >
> >
> > fs/dcache.c | 144 +++++++++++-
> > fs/libfs.c | 10 +-
> > fs/notify/fsnotify.c | 6 +-
> > include/linux/dcache.h | 6 +
> > tools/testing/selftests/filesystems/Makefile | 1 +
> > .../selftests/filesystems/dcache_stress.c | 210 ++++++++++++++++++
> > 6 files changed, 370 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/filesystems/dcache_stress.c
> >
> > --
> > Signature
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 7091 bytes --]