From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
Olga Kornievskaia <okorniev@redhat.com>,
Dai Ngo <Dai.Ngo@oracle.com>, Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] nfsd: allocate new session-based DRC slots on demand.
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2024 08:49:20 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <88bcf45dd056320171de9442d5d3684a2f37a612.camel@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <173344943283.1734440.2066475669031086509@noble.neil.brown.name>
On Fri, 2024-12-06 at 12:43 +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Fri, 06 Dec 2024, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > On Fri, 2024-12-06 at 11:43 +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> > > If a client ever uses the highest available slot for a given session,
> > > attempt to allocate more slots so there is room for the client to use
> > > them if wanted. GFP_NOWAIT is used so if there is not plenty of
> > > free memory, failure is expected - which is what we want. It also
> > > allows the allocation while holding a spinlock.
> > >
> > > Each time we increase the number of slots by 20% (rounded up). This
> > > allows fairly quick growth while avoiding excessive over-shoot.
> > >
> > > We would expect to stablise with around 10% more slots available than
> > > the client actually uses.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> > > ---
> > > fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > > 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> > > index 67dfc699e411..ec4468ebbd40 100644
> > > --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> > > +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> > > @@ -4235,11 +4235,6 @@ nfsd4_sequence(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
> > > slot = xa_load(&session->se_slots, seq->slotid);
> > > dprintk("%s: slotid %d\n", __func__, seq->slotid);
> > >
> > > - /* We do not negotiate the number of slots yet, so set the
> > > - * maxslots to the session maxreqs which is used to encode
> > > - * sr_highest_slotid and the sr_target_slot id to maxslots */
> > > - seq->maxslots = session->se_fchannel.maxreqs;
> > > -
> > > trace_nfsd_slot_seqid_sequence(clp, seq, slot);
> > > status = check_slot_seqid(seq->seqid, slot->sl_seqid,
> > > slot->sl_flags & NFSD4_SLOT_INUSE);
> > > @@ -4289,6 +4284,41 @@ nfsd4_sequence(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
> > > cstate->session = session;
> > > cstate->clp = clp;
> > >
> > > + /*
> > > + * If the client ever uses the highest available slot,
> > > + * gently try to allocate another 20%. This allows
> > > + * fairly quick growth without grossly over-shooting what
> > > + * the client might use.
> > > + */
> >
> > 20% seems like a reasonable place to start, but I do wonder if this
> > might need to be tunable under some workloads. Oh well, we can cross
> > that bridge if/when someone complains.
>
> I think that if we need a tunable, then it is a failure of design.
> If?when someone complains we may well need to redesign. I hope we could
> avoid a tunable in that design!
>
I hope so too.
> >
> > > + if (seq->slotid == session->se_fchannel.maxreqs - 1 &&
> > > + session->se_fchannel.maxreqs < NFSD_MAX_SLOTS_PER_SESSION) {
> > > + int s = session->se_fchannel.maxreqs;
> > > + int cnt = DIV_ROUND_UP(s, 5);
> > > +
> > > + do {
> > > + /*
> > > + * GFP_NOWAIT is a low-priority non-blocking
> > > + * allocation which can be used under
> > > + * client_lock and only succeeds if there is
> > > + * plenty of memory.
> > > + * Use GFP_ATOMIC which is higher priority for
> > > + * xa_store() so we are less likely to waste the
> > > + * effort of the first allocation.
> > > + */
> >
> > I don't know here. Why not just use GFP_NOWAIT for the xa_store too? If
> > we're so memory constrained that that fails, we're probably better off
> > releasing the slot.
>
> Maybe. I'm open simple using GFP_NOWAIT both places.
> Most often xa_store won't need to allocate anything - it adds slots to
> the array in batches (at least I assume it does - anything else would be
> inefficient). So it mostly won't matter.
> So if seems at all inelegant - let's drop it.
>
>
I'd prefer we drop that part. It probably won't matter much in the long
run anyway.
>
> >
> > > + slot = kzalloc(slot_bytes(&session->se_fchannel),
> > > + GFP_NOWAIT);
> > > + if (slot &&
> > > + !xa_is_err(xa_store(&session->se_slots, s, slot,
> > > + GFP_ATOMIC | __GFP_NOWARN))) {
> > > + s += 1;
> > > + session->se_fchannel.maxreqs = s;
> > > + } else {
> > > + kfree(slot);
> > > + }
> > > + } while (slot && --cnt > 0);
> > > + }
> > > + seq->maxslots = session->se_fchannel.maxreqs;
> > > +
> > > out:
> > > switch (clp->cl_cb_state) {
> > > case NFSD4_CB_DOWN:
> >
> > --
> > Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
> >
> >
>
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-12-06 13:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-06 0:43 [PATCH 0/6 v3] nfsd: allocate/free session-based DRC slots on demand NeilBrown
2024-12-06 0:43 ` [PATCH 1/6] nfsd: use an xarray to store v4.1 session slots NeilBrown
2024-12-06 0:43 ` [PATCH 2/6] nfsd: remove artificial limits on the session-based DRC NeilBrown
2024-12-06 0:43 ` [PATCH 3/6] nfsd: add session slot count to /proc/fs/nfsd/clients/*/info NeilBrown
2024-12-06 0:43 ` [PATCH 4/6] nfsd: allocate new session-based DRC slots on demand NeilBrown
2024-12-06 1:04 ` Jeff Layton
2024-12-06 1:43 ` NeilBrown
2024-12-06 13:49 ` Jeff Layton [this message]
2024-12-06 20:51 ` Chuck Lever
2024-12-08 4:52 ` NeilBrown
2024-12-06 0:43 ` [PATCH 5/6] nfsd: add support for freeing unused session-DRC slots NeilBrown
2024-12-06 5:30 ` Jeff Layton
2024-12-06 6:05 ` NeilBrown
2024-12-06 13:59 ` Jeff Layton
2024-12-06 0:43 ` [PATCH 6/6] nfsd: add shrinker to reduce number of slots allocated per session NeilBrown
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-12-11 21:47 [PATCH 0/6 v5] nfsd: allocate/free session-based DRC slots on demand NeilBrown
2024-12-11 21:47 ` [PATCH 4/6] nfsd: allocate new " NeilBrown
2024-12-08 22:43 [PATCH 0/6 v4] nfsd: allocate/free " NeilBrown
2024-12-08 22:43 ` [PATCH 4/6] nfsd: allocate new " NeilBrown
2024-11-19 0:41 [PATCH 0/6 RFC v2] nfsd: allocate/free " NeilBrown
2024-11-19 0:41 ` [PATCH 4/6] nfsd: allocate new " NeilBrown
2024-11-19 19:20 ` Chuck Lever
2024-11-19 22:27 ` NeilBrown
2024-11-20 0:32 ` Chuck Lever
2024-11-21 21:20 ` NeilBrown
2024-11-19 19:34 ` Jeff Layton
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=88bcf45dd056320171de9442d5d3684a2f37a612.camel@kernel.org \
--to=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=Dai.Ngo@oracle.com \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=okorniev@redhat.com \
--cc=tom@talpey.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