From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Sep 8 04:59:16 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A6F61065672; Sat, 8 Sep 2012 04:59:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gleb.kurtsou@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pz0-f54.google.com (mail-pz0-f54.google.com [209.85.210.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45F9C8FC0A; Sat, 8 Sep 2012 04:59:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by dadr6 with SMTP id r6so198540dad.13 for ; Fri, 07 Sep 2012 21:59:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=n1qtwypXX5SYqMVVSdaY5t0Tr71yV4iq8TiVyLekHiI=; b=he/DQyJQVWSgADdGk+qJLApSYfKir2w5c3e2wKDS1mLvC7PutsBsMaCMaFWahL2wkW ufS4oX/0s+Q4co6dIwzXqkD+VrhW0YEPPIuokPx36AhnlIbHs/Z4DiKdyz56+edf42VO RsOtDG6NTwDF1ya840qIEBPacwnNAjShCuu6baUvav3BUZJ5VIiBzq3Sf4Irj9ExwIXw Ki9t53hrZAJayHfM8pGZCqcKJyKyG4wqEB19U2BzriDXpxZQ1zalS2p+HsBBzeEGI045 3UI9Au37IWlxiu64bm9QXoiIzv+JTjz6Nb+4yhZzzGkKavyMnB4INkJBPxbBOacFhbUu JMiQ== Received: by 10.68.129.131 with SMTP id nw3mr13724526pbb.43.1347080355487; Fri, 07 Sep 2012 21:59:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (c-24-130-155-143.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [24.130.155.143]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id pj10sm4477604pbb.46.2012.09.07.21.59.13 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 07 Sep 2012 21:59:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2012 21:59:21 -0700 From: Gleb Kurtsou To: Konstantin Belousov Message-ID: <20120908045921.GA1419@reks> References: <20120905091854.GD33100@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120905091854.GD33100@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: pho@freebsd.org, fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Nullfs shared lookup X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2012 04:59:16 -0000 On (05/09/2012 12:18), Konstantin Belousov wrote: > I, together with Peter Holm, developed a patch to enable shared lookups > on nullfs mounts when lower filesystem allows the shared lookups. The lack > of shared lookup support for nullfs is quite visible on any VFS-intensive > workloads which utilize path translations. In particular, it was a complain > on $dayjob which started me thinking about this issue. > > There are two problems which prevent direct translation of shared > lookup bit into nullfs upper mount bit: > > 1. When vfs_lookup() calls VOP_LOOKUP() for nullfs, which passes lookup > operation to lower fs, resulting vnode is often only shared-locked. Then > null_nodeget() cannot instantiate covering vnode for lower vnode, since > insmntque1() and null_hashins() require exclusive lock on the lower. > > The solution is straightforward, if null hash failed to find pre-existing > nullfs vnode for lower vnode, the lower vnode lock is upgraded. > > 2. (More serious). Nullfs reclaims its vnodes on deactivation. The cause > is due to nullfs inability to detect reclamation of the lower vnode. > Reclamation of a nullfs vnode at deactivation time prevents a reference > to the lower vnode to become stale. > > Unfortunately, this means that all lookups on nullfs need exclusive lock > to instantiate upper vnode, which is never cached. > > Solution which we propose is to add VFS notification to the upper > filesystem about reclamation of the vnode in the lower filesystem. Now, > vgone() calls new VFS op vfs_reclaim_lowervp() with an argument lowervp > which is reclaimed. It is possible to register several reclamation event > listeners, to correctly handle the case of several nullfs mounts over > the same directory. > > For the filesystem not having nullfs mounts over it, the overhead added is > a single mount interlock lock/unlock in the vnode reclamation path. > > Benchmarks consisting of up 1K threads doing parallel stat(2) on the > same file demonstate almost constant execution time, not depending of > number of running threads. While without the patch, exec time between > single-threaded run and run with 1024 threads performing the same total > count of stat(2), differ in 6 times. > > Somewhat problematic detail, IMO, is that nullfs reclamation procedure > calls vput() on the lowervp vnode, temporary unlocking the vnode being > reclaimed. This seems to be fine for MPSAFE filesystems, but not-MPSAFE > code often put partially initialized vnode on some globally visible > list, and later can decide that half-constructed vnode is not needed. > If nullfs mount is created above such filesystem, then other threads > might catch such not properly initialized vnode. Instead of trying > to overcome this case, e.g. by recursing the lower vnode lock in > null_reclaim_lowervp(), I decided to rely on nearby extermination of > non-MPSAFE filesystems support. > > I think that unionfs can also benefit from this mechanism, but I did not > even looked at unionfs. > > Patch is available at > http://people.freebsd.org/~kib/misc/nullfs_shared_lookup.1.patch > It survived stress2 torturing. > > Comments ? I only had a glance look at the patch, sorry it I missed something obvious. How do we achieve propagation of rename/rm/rmdir to upper level name cache?