From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
To: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@primarydata.com>
Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 4/7] NFS: support RCU_WALK in nfs_permission()
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 11:28:20 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140714012820.12562.43671.stgit@notabene.brown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140714011630.12562.1940.stgit@notabene.brown>
nfs_permission makes two calls which are not always safe in RCU_WALK,
rpc_lookup_cred and nfs_do_access.
The second can easily be made rcu-safe by aborting with -ECHILD before
making the RPC call.
The former can be made rcu-safe by calling rpc_lookup_cred_nonblock()
instead.
As this will almost always succeed, we use it even when RCU_WALK
isn't being used as it still saves some spinlocks in a common case.
We only fall back to rpc_lookup_cred() if rpc_lookup_cred_nonblock()
fails and MAY_NOT_BLOCK isn't set.
This optimisation (always trying rpc_lookup_cred_nonblock()) is
particularly important when a security module is active.
In that case inode_permission() may return -ECHILD from
security_inode_permission() even though ->permission() succeeded in
RCU_WALK mode.
This leads to may_lookup() retrying inode_permission after performing
unlazy_walk(). The spinlock that rpc_lookup_cred() takes is often
more expensive than anything security_inode_permission() does, so that
spinlock becomes the main bottleneck.
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
---
fs/nfs/dir.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/nfs/dir.c b/fs/nfs/dir.c
index 3c2b36acf291..ac958f29e558 100644
--- a/fs/nfs/dir.c
+++ b/fs/nfs/dir.c
@@ -2288,6 +2288,10 @@ static int nfs_do_access(struct inode *inode, struct rpc_cred *cred, int mask)
if (status == 0)
goto out_cached;
+ status = -ECHILD;
+ if (mask & MAY_NOT_BLOCK)
+ goto out;
+
/* Be clever: ask server to check for all possible rights */
cache.mask = MAY_EXEC | MAY_WRITE | MAY_READ;
cache.cred = cred;
@@ -2364,15 +2368,23 @@ force_lookup:
if (!NFS_PROTO(inode)->access)
goto out_notsup;
- if (mask & MAY_NOT_BLOCK)
- return -ECHILD;
-
- cred = rpc_lookup_cred();
- if (!IS_ERR(cred)) {
- res = nfs_do_access(inode, cred, mask);
- put_rpccred(cred);
- } else
+ /* Always try fast lookups first */
+ rcu_read_lock();
+ cred = rpc_lookup_cred_nonblock();
+ if (!IS_ERR(cred))
+ res = nfs_do_access(inode, cred, mask|MAY_NOT_BLOCK);
+ else
res = PTR_ERR(cred);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
+ if (res == -ECHILD && !(mask & MAY_NOT_BLOCK)) {
+ /* Fast lookup failed, try the slow way */
+ cred = rpc_lookup_cred();
+ if (!IS_ERR(cred)) {
+ res = nfs_do_access(inode, cred, mask);
+ put_rpccred(cred);
+ } else
+ res = PTR_ERR(cred);
+ }
out:
if (!res && (mask & MAY_EXEC) && !execute_ok(inode))
res = -EACCES;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-14 1:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-14 1:28 [PATCH 0/7] Add RCU-walk support to NFS NeilBrown
2014-07-14 1:28 ` [PATCH 5/7] NFS: teach nfs_neg_need_reval to understand LOOKUP_RCU NeilBrown
2014-07-14 1:28 ` [PATCH 3/7] sunrpc/auth: allow lockless (rcu) lookup of credential cache NeilBrown
2014-07-14 1:28 ` [PATCH 6/7] NFS: teach nfs_lookup_verify_inode to handle LOOKUP_RCU NeilBrown
2014-07-14 1:28 ` [PATCH 2/7] NFS: prepare for RCU-walk support but pushing tests later in code NeilBrown
2014-07-14 1:28 ` [PATCH 1/7] NFS: nfs4_lookup_revalidate: only evaluate parent if it will be used NeilBrown
2014-07-15 16:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-07-14 1:28 ` [PATCH 7/7] NFS: allow lockless access to access_cache NeilBrown
2014-07-14 1:28 ` NeilBrown [this message]
2014-07-14 2:00 ` [PATCH 0/7] Add RCU-walk support to NFS Trond Myklebust
2014-07-14 2:25 ` NeilBrown
2014-07-14 2:39 ` Trond Myklebust
2014-07-23 7:14 ` 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=20140714012820.12562.43671.stgit@notabene.brown \
--to=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trond.myklebust@primarydata.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).