public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, DSA <debian-admin@lists.debian.org>,
	team@security.debian.org, libpam-modules@packages.debian.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.28, rlimits, performance and debian etch
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 14:02:10 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <497A3E62.6010706@caviumnetworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8763k5u3xs.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>

Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Peter Palfrader:
> 
>> Turns out that script is forking a lot and something in it or python or
>> whereever closes all the file descriptors it doesn't want to pass on.
>> That is, it starts at zero and goes up to ulimit -n/RLIMIT_NOFILE and
>> closes them all with a few exceptions.
>>
>> Turns out that takes a long time when your limit -n is now 2^20 (1048576).
> 
> Interesting.
> 
> Can we make /proc more-or-less mandatory, so that the file descriptor
> list can be retrieved explicitly?

One problem is that for values of RLIMIT_NOFILE less than something like 
4096, it is much faster to call sys_close() on all possible values than 
iterate through a handful of open files from /proc/self/fd using 
opendir(3)/readdir(3).

Obviously for some large values of RLIMIT_NOFILE, this is no longer true.

People who have written code based on measuring the difference end up 
getting screwed when RLIMIT_NOFILE unexpectedly increases.

The real solution is to convert your user space programs to use the new 
syscalls that allow for race-free setting of close-on-exec.  Then you no 
longer need to mess around with iterating over these things.

David Daney

  reply	other threads:[~2009-01-23 22:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-01-21 11:52 2.6.28, rlimits, performance and debian etch Peter Palfrader
2009-01-23 21:07 ` Florian Weimer
2009-01-23 22:02   ` David Daney [this message]
2009-01-23 23:11     ` Peter Palfrader
2009-01-25 10:59     ` Florian Weimer
2009-01-27 23:17 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-29 12:19   ` Adam Tkac
2009-01-29 18:05     ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-29 18:10       ` Peter Palfrader
2009-02-02 16:20       ` Adam Tkac
2009-02-08 22:31     ` Steve Langasek
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-02-26 21:48 Frans Pop
2009-02-26 22:01 ` Steve Langasek
2009-02-27  7:30 ` Peter Palfrader

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=497A3E62.6010706@caviumnetworks.com \
    --to=ddaney@caviumnetworks.com \
    --cc=debian-admin@lists.debian.org \
    --cc=fw@deneb.enyo.de \
    --cc=libpam-modules@packages.debian.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=team@security.debian.org \
    /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