2
0
mirror of https://github.com/edk2-porting/linux-next.git synced 2024-12-22 20:23:57 +08:00
linux-next/fs/file_table.c

508 lines
12 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

/*
* linux/fs/file_table.c
*
* Copyright (C) 1991, 1992 Linus Torvalds
* Copyright (C) 1997 David S. Miller (davem@caip.rutgers.edu)
*/
#include <linux/string.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/file.h>
#include <linux/fdtable.h>
#include <linux/init.h>
#include <linux/module.h>
#include <linux/fs.h>
#include <linux/security.h>
#include <linux/eventpoll.h>
#include <linux/rcupdate.h>
#include <linux/mount.h>
#include <linux/capability.h>
#include <linux/cdev.h>
#include <linux/fsnotify.h>
#include <linux/sysctl.h>
fs: scale files_lock fs: scale files_lock Improve scalability of files_lock by adding per-cpu, per-sb files lists, protected with an lglock. The lglock provides fast access to the per-cpu lists to add and remove files. It also provides a snapshot of all the per-cpu lists (although this is very slow). One difficulty with this approach is that a file can be removed from the list by another CPU. We must track which per-cpu list the file is on with a new variale in the file struct (packed into a hole on 64-bit archs). Scalability could suffer if files are frequently removed from different cpu's list. However loads with frequent removal of files imply short interval between adding and removing the files, and the scheduler attempts to avoid moving processes too far away. Also, even in the case of cross-CPU removal, the hardware has much more opportunity to parallelise cacheline transfers with N cachelines than with 1. A worst-case test of 1 CPU allocating files subsequently being freed by N CPUs degenerates to contending on a single lock, which is no worse than before. When more than one CPU are allocating files, even if they are always freed by different CPUs, there will be more parallelism than the single-lock case. Testing results: On a 2 socket, 8 core opteron, I measure the number of times the lock is taken to remove the file, the number of times it is removed by the same CPU that added it, and the number of times it is removed by the same node that added it. Booting: locks= 25049 cpu-hits= 23174 (92.5%) node-hits= 23945 (95.6%) kbuild -j16 locks=2281913 cpu-hits=2208126 (96.8%) node-hits=2252674 (98.7%) dbench 64 locks=4306582 cpu-hits=4287247 (99.6%) node-hits=4299527 (99.8%) So a file is removed from the same CPU it was added by over 90% of the time. It remains within the same node 95% of the time. Tim Chen ran some numbers for a 64 thread Nehalem system performing a compile. throughput 2.6.34-rc2 24.5 +patch 24.9 us sys idle IO wait (in %) 2.6.34-rc2 51.25 28.25 17.25 3.25 +patch 53.75 18.5 19 8.75 So significantly less CPU time spent in kernel code, higher idle time and slightly higher throughput. Single threaded performance difference was within the noise of microbenchmarks. That is not to say penalty does not exist, the code is larger and more memory accesses required so it will be slightly slower. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2010-08-18 02:37:38 +08:00
#include <linux/lglock.h>
#include <linux/percpu_counter.h>
fs: scale files_lock fs: scale files_lock Improve scalability of files_lock by adding per-cpu, per-sb files lists, protected with an lglock. The lglock provides fast access to the per-cpu lists to add and remove files. It also provides a snapshot of all the per-cpu lists (although this is very slow). One difficulty with this approach is that a file can be removed from the list by another CPU. We must track which per-cpu list the file is on with a new variale in the file struct (packed into a hole on 64-bit archs). Scalability could suffer if files are frequently removed from different cpu's list. However loads with frequent removal of files imply short interval between adding and removing the files, and the scheduler attempts to avoid moving processes too far away. Also, even in the case of cross-CPU removal, the hardware has much more opportunity to parallelise cacheline transfers with N cachelines than with 1. A worst-case test of 1 CPU allocating files subsequently being freed by N CPUs degenerates to contending on a single lock, which is no worse than before. When more than one CPU are allocating files, even if they are always freed by different CPUs, there will be more parallelism than the single-lock case. Testing results: On a 2 socket, 8 core opteron, I measure the number of times the lock is taken to remove the file, the number of times it is removed by the same CPU that added it, and the number of times it is removed by the same node that added it. Booting: locks= 25049 cpu-hits= 23174 (92.5%) node-hits= 23945 (95.6%) kbuild -j16 locks=2281913 cpu-hits=2208126 (96.8%) node-hits=2252674 (98.7%) dbench 64 locks=4306582 cpu-hits=4287247 (99.6%) node-hits=4299527 (99.8%) So a file is removed from the same CPU it was added by over 90% of the time. It remains within the same node 95% of the time. Tim Chen ran some numbers for a 64 thread Nehalem system performing a compile. throughput 2.6.34-rc2 24.5 +patch 24.9 us sys idle IO wait (in %) 2.6.34-rc2 51.25 28.25 17.25 3.25 +patch 53.75 18.5 19 8.75 So significantly less CPU time spent in kernel code, higher idle time and slightly higher throughput. Single threaded performance difference was within the noise of microbenchmarks. That is not to say penalty does not exist, the code is larger and more memory accesses required so it will be slightly slower. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2010-08-18 02:37:38 +08:00
#include <linux/percpu.h>
#include <linux/ima.h>
#include <asm/atomic.h>
#include "internal.h"
/* sysctl tunables... */
struct files_stat_struct files_stat = {
.max_files = NR_FILE
};
fs: scale files_lock fs: scale files_lock Improve scalability of files_lock by adding per-cpu, per-sb files lists, protected with an lglock. The lglock provides fast access to the per-cpu lists to add and remove files. It also provides a snapshot of all the per-cpu lists (although this is very slow). One difficulty with this approach is that a file can be removed from the list by another CPU. We must track which per-cpu list the file is on with a new variale in the file struct (packed into a hole on 64-bit archs). Scalability could suffer if files are frequently removed from different cpu's list. However loads with frequent removal of files imply short interval between adding and removing the files, and the scheduler attempts to avoid moving processes too far away. Also, even in the case of cross-CPU removal, the hardware has much more opportunity to parallelise cacheline transfers with N cachelines than with 1. A worst-case test of 1 CPU allocating files subsequently being freed by N CPUs degenerates to contending on a single lock, which is no worse than before. When more than one CPU are allocating files, even if they are always freed by different CPUs, there will be more parallelism than the single-lock case. Testing results: On a 2 socket, 8 core opteron, I measure the number of times the lock is taken to remove the file, the number of times it is removed by the same CPU that added it, and the number of times it is removed by the same node that added it. Booting: locks= 25049 cpu-hits= 23174 (92.5%) node-hits= 23945 (95.6%) kbuild -j16 locks=2281913 cpu-hits=2208126 (96.8%) node-hits=2252674 (98.7%) dbench 64 locks=4306582 cpu-hits=4287247 (99.6%) node-hits=4299527 (99.8%) So a file is removed from the same CPU it was added by over 90% of the time. It remains within the same node 95% of the time. Tim Chen ran some numbers for a 64 thread Nehalem system performing a compile. throughput 2.6.34-rc2 24.5 +patch 24.9 us sys idle IO wait (in %) 2.6.34-rc2 51.25 28.25 17.25 3.25 +patch 53.75 18.5 19 8.75 So significantly less CPU time spent in kernel code, higher idle time and slightly higher throughput. Single threaded performance difference was within the noise of microbenchmarks. That is not to say penalty does not exist, the code is larger and more memory accesses required so it will be slightly slower. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2010-08-18 02:37:38 +08:00
DECLARE_LGLOCK(files_lglock);
DEFINE_LGLOCK(files_lglock);
/* SLAB cache for file structures */
static struct kmem_cache *filp_cachep __read_mostly;
static struct percpu_counter nr_files __cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
static inline void file_free_rcu(struct rcu_head *head)
{
struct file *f = container_of(head, struct file, f_u.fu_rcuhead);
put_cred(f->f_cred);
kmem_cache_free(filp_cachep, f);
}
static inline void file_free(struct file *f)
{
percpu_counter_dec(&nr_files);
file_check_state(f);
call_rcu(&f->f_u.fu_rcuhead, file_free_rcu);
}
/*
* Return the total number of open files in the system
*/
static int get_nr_files(void)
{
return percpu_counter_read_positive(&nr_files);
}
/*
* Return the maximum number of open files in the system
*/
int get_max_files(void)
{
return files_stat.max_files;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(get_max_files);
/*
* Handle nr_files sysctl
*/
#if defined(CONFIG_SYSCTL) && defined(CONFIG_PROC_FS)
int proc_nr_files(ctl_table *table, int write,
void __user *buffer, size_t *lenp, loff_t *ppos)
{
files_stat.nr_files = get_nr_files();
return proc_dointvec(table, write, buffer, lenp, ppos);
}
#else
int proc_nr_files(ctl_table *table, int write,
void __user *buffer, size_t *lenp, loff_t *ppos)
{
return -ENOSYS;
}
#endif
/* Find an unused file structure and return a pointer to it.
* Returns NULL, if there are no more free file structures or
* we run out of memory.
*
* Be very careful using this. You are responsible for
* getting write access to any mount that you might assign
* to this filp, if it is opened for write. If this is not
* done, you will imbalance int the mount's writer count
* and a warning at __fput() time.
*/
struct file *get_empty_filp(void)
{
const struct cred *cred = current_cred();
static int old_max;
struct file * f;
/*
* Privileged users can go above max_files
*/
if (get_nr_files() >= files_stat.max_files && !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN)) {
/*
* percpu_counters are inaccurate. Do an expensive check before
* we go and fail.
*/
if (percpu_counter_sum_positive(&nr_files) >= files_stat.max_files)
goto over;
}
f = kmem_cache_zalloc(filp_cachep, GFP_KERNEL);
if (f == NULL)
goto fail;
percpu_counter_inc(&nr_files);
if (security_file_alloc(f))
goto fail_sec;
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&f->f_u.fu_list);
atomic_long_set(&f->f_count, 1);
rwlock_init(&f->f_owner.lock);
f->f_cred = get_cred(cred);
spin_lock_init(&f->f_lock);
eventpoll_init_file(f);
/* f->f_version: 0 */
return f;
over:
/* Ran out of filps - report that */
if (get_nr_files() > old_max) {
printk(KERN_INFO "VFS: file-max limit %d reached\n",
get_max_files());
old_max = get_nr_files();
}
goto fail;
fail_sec:
file_free(f);
fail:
return NULL;
}
r/o bind mounts: filesystem helpers for custom 'struct file's Why do we need r/o bind mounts? This feature allows a read-only view into a read-write filesystem. In the process of doing that, it also provides infrastructure for keeping track of the number of writers to any given mount. This has a number of uses. It allows chroots to have parts of filesystems writable. It will be useful for containers in the future because users may have root inside a container, but should not be allowed to write to somefilesystems. This also replaces patches that vserver has had out of the tree for several years. It allows security enhancement by making sure that parts of your filesystem read-only (such as when you don't trust your FTP server), when you don't want to have entire new filesystems mounted, or when you want atime selectively updated. I've been using the following script to test that the feature is working as desired. It takes a directory and makes a regular bind and a r/o bind mount of it. It then performs some normal filesystem operations on the three directories, including ones that are expected to fail, like creating a file on the r/o mount. This patch: Some filesystems forego the vfs and may_open() and create their own 'struct file's. This patch creates a couple of helper functions which can be used by these filesystems, and will provide a unified place which the r/o bind mount code may patch. Also, rename an existing, static-scope init_file() to a less generic name. Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-10-17 14:31:13 +08:00
/**
* alloc_file - allocate and initialize a 'struct file'
* @mnt: the vfsmount on which the file will reside
* @dentry: the dentry representing the new file
* @mode: the mode with which the new file will be opened
* @fop: the 'struct file_operations' for the new file
*
* Use this instead of get_empty_filp() to get a new
* 'struct file'. Do so because of the same initialization
* pitfalls reasons listed for init_file(). This is a
* preferred interface to using init_file().
*
* If all the callers of init_file() are eliminated, its
* code should be moved into this function.
*/
struct file *alloc_file(struct path *path, fmode_t mode,
const struct file_operations *fop)
r/o bind mounts: filesystem helpers for custom 'struct file's Why do we need r/o bind mounts? This feature allows a read-only view into a read-write filesystem. In the process of doing that, it also provides infrastructure for keeping track of the number of writers to any given mount. This has a number of uses. It allows chroots to have parts of filesystems writable. It will be useful for containers in the future because users may have root inside a container, but should not be allowed to write to somefilesystems. This also replaces patches that vserver has had out of the tree for several years. It allows security enhancement by making sure that parts of your filesystem read-only (such as when you don't trust your FTP server), when you don't want to have entire new filesystems mounted, or when you want atime selectively updated. I've been using the following script to test that the feature is working as desired. It takes a directory and makes a regular bind and a r/o bind mount of it. It then performs some normal filesystem operations on the three directories, including ones that are expected to fail, like creating a file on the r/o mount. This patch: Some filesystems forego the vfs and may_open() and create their own 'struct file's. This patch creates a couple of helper functions which can be used by these filesystems, and will provide a unified place which the r/o bind mount code may patch. Also, rename an existing, static-scope init_file() to a less generic name. Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-10-17 14:31:13 +08:00
{
struct file *file;
file = get_empty_filp();
if (!file)
return NULL;
file->f_path = *path;
file->f_mapping = path->dentry->d_inode->i_mapping;
r/o bind mounts: filesystem helpers for custom 'struct file's Why do we need r/o bind mounts? This feature allows a read-only view into a read-write filesystem. In the process of doing that, it also provides infrastructure for keeping track of the number of writers to any given mount. This has a number of uses. It allows chroots to have parts of filesystems writable. It will be useful for containers in the future because users may have root inside a container, but should not be allowed to write to somefilesystems. This also replaces patches that vserver has had out of the tree for several years. It allows security enhancement by making sure that parts of your filesystem read-only (such as when you don't trust your FTP server), when you don't want to have entire new filesystems mounted, or when you want atime selectively updated. I've been using the following script to test that the feature is working as desired. It takes a directory and makes a regular bind and a r/o bind mount of it. It then performs some normal filesystem operations on the three directories, including ones that are expected to fail, like creating a file on the r/o mount. This patch: Some filesystems forego the vfs and may_open() and create their own 'struct file's. This patch creates a couple of helper functions which can be used by these filesystems, and will provide a unified place which the r/o bind mount code may patch. Also, rename an existing, static-scope init_file() to a less generic name. Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-10-17 14:31:13 +08:00
file->f_mode = mode;
file->f_op = fop;
/*
* These mounts don't really matter in practice
* for r/o bind mounts. They aren't userspace-
* visible. We do this for consistency, and so
* that we can do debugging checks at __fput()
*/
if ((mode & FMODE_WRITE) && !special_file(path->dentry->d_inode->i_mode)) {
file_take_write(file);
WARN_ON(mnt_clone_write(path->mnt));
}
ima_counts_get(file);
return file;
r/o bind mounts: filesystem helpers for custom 'struct file's Why do we need r/o bind mounts? This feature allows a read-only view into a read-write filesystem. In the process of doing that, it also provides infrastructure for keeping track of the number of writers to any given mount. This has a number of uses. It allows chroots to have parts of filesystems writable. It will be useful for containers in the future because users may have root inside a container, but should not be allowed to write to somefilesystems. This also replaces patches that vserver has had out of the tree for several years. It allows security enhancement by making sure that parts of your filesystem read-only (such as when you don't trust your FTP server), when you don't want to have entire new filesystems mounted, or when you want atime selectively updated. I've been using the following script to test that the feature is working as desired. It takes a directory and makes a regular bind and a r/o bind mount of it. It then performs some normal filesystem operations on the three directories, including ones that are expected to fail, like creating a file on the r/o mount. This patch: Some filesystems forego the vfs and may_open() and create their own 'struct file's. This patch creates a couple of helper functions which can be used by these filesystems, and will provide a unified place which the r/o bind mount code may patch. Also, rename an existing, static-scope init_file() to a less generic name. Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-10-17 14:31:13 +08:00
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(alloc_file);
r/o bind mounts: filesystem helpers for custom 'struct file's Why do we need r/o bind mounts? This feature allows a read-only view into a read-write filesystem. In the process of doing that, it also provides infrastructure for keeping track of the number of writers to any given mount. This has a number of uses. It allows chroots to have parts of filesystems writable. It will be useful for containers in the future because users may have root inside a container, but should not be allowed to write to somefilesystems. This also replaces patches that vserver has had out of the tree for several years. It allows security enhancement by making sure that parts of your filesystem read-only (such as when you don't trust your FTP server), when you don't want to have entire new filesystems mounted, or when you want atime selectively updated. I've been using the following script to test that the feature is working as desired. It takes a directory and makes a regular bind and a r/o bind mount of it. It then performs some normal filesystem operations on the three directories, including ones that are expected to fail, like creating a file on the r/o mount. This patch: Some filesystems forego the vfs and may_open() and create their own 'struct file's. This patch creates a couple of helper functions which can be used by these filesystems, and will provide a unified place which the r/o bind mount code may patch. Also, rename an existing, static-scope init_file() to a less generic name. Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2007-10-17 14:31:13 +08:00
/**
* drop_file_write_access - give up ability to write to a file
* @file: the file to which we will stop writing
*
* This is a central place which will give up the ability
* to write to @file, along with access to write through
* its vfsmount.
*/
void drop_file_write_access(struct file *file)
{
struct vfsmount *mnt = file->f_path.mnt;
struct dentry *dentry = file->f_path.dentry;
struct inode *inode = dentry->d_inode;
put_write_access(inode);
if (special_file(inode->i_mode))
return;
if (file_check_writeable(file) != 0)
return;
mnt_drop_write(mnt);
file_release_write(file);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(drop_file_write_access);
/* the real guts of fput() - releasing the last reference to file
*/
static void __fput(struct file *file)
{
struct dentry *dentry = file->f_path.dentry;
struct vfsmount *mnt = file->f_path.mnt;
struct inode *inode = dentry->d_inode;
might_sleep();
fsnotify_close(file);
/*
* The function eventpoll_release() should be the first called
* in the file cleanup chain.
*/
eventpoll_release(file);
locks_remove_flock(file);
if (unlikely(file->f_flags & FASYNC)) {
if (file->f_op && file->f_op->fasync)
file->f_op->fasync(-1, file, 0);
}
if (file->f_op && file->f_op->release)
file->f_op->release(inode, file);
security_file_free(file);
ima_file_free(file);
if (unlikely(S_ISCHR(inode->i_mode) && inode->i_cdev != NULL))
cdev_put(inode->i_cdev);
fops_put(file->f_op);
put_pid(file->f_owner.pid);
file_sb_list_del(file);
if (file->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE)
drop_file_write_access(file);
file->f_path.dentry = NULL;
file->f_path.mnt = NULL;
file_free(file);
dput(dentry);
mntput(mnt);
}
void fput(struct file *file)
{
if (atomic_long_dec_and_test(&file->f_count))
__fput(file);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(fput);
struct file *fget(unsigned int fd)
{
struct file *file;
struct files_struct *files = current->files;
rcu_read_lock();
file = fcheck_files(files, fd);
if (file) {
if (!atomic_long_inc_not_zero(&file->f_count)) {
/* File object ref couldn't be taken */
rcu_read_unlock();
return NULL;
}
}
rcu_read_unlock();
return file;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(fget);
/*
* Lightweight file lookup - no refcnt increment if fd table isn't shared.
*
* You can use this instead of fget if you satisfy all of the following
* conditions:
* 1) You must call fput_light before exiting the syscall and returning control
* to userspace (i.e. you cannot remember the returned struct file * after
* returning to userspace).
* 2) You must not call filp_close on the returned struct file * in between
* calls to fget_light and fput_light.
* 3) You must not clone the current task in between the calls to fget_light
* and fput_light.
*
* The fput_needed flag returned by fget_light should be passed to the
* corresponding fput_light.
*/
struct file *fget_light(unsigned int fd, int *fput_needed)
{
struct file *file;
struct files_struct *files = current->files;
*fput_needed = 0;
if (likely((atomic_read(&files->count) == 1))) {
file = fcheck_files(files, fd);
} else {
rcu_read_lock();
file = fcheck_files(files, fd);
if (file) {
if (atomic_long_inc_not_zero(&file->f_count))
*fput_needed = 1;
else
/* Didn't get the reference, someone's freed */
file = NULL;
}
rcu_read_unlock();
}
return file;
}
void put_filp(struct file *file)
{
if (atomic_long_dec_and_test(&file->f_count)) {
security_file_free(file);
file_sb_list_del(file);
file_free(file);
}
}
fs: scale files_lock fs: scale files_lock Improve scalability of files_lock by adding per-cpu, per-sb files lists, protected with an lglock. The lglock provides fast access to the per-cpu lists to add and remove files. It also provides a snapshot of all the per-cpu lists (although this is very slow). One difficulty with this approach is that a file can be removed from the list by another CPU. We must track which per-cpu list the file is on with a new variale in the file struct (packed into a hole on 64-bit archs). Scalability could suffer if files are frequently removed from different cpu's list. However loads with frequent removal of files imply short interval between adding and removing the files, and the scheduler attempts to avoid moving processes too far away. Also, even in the case of cross-CPU removal, the hardware has much more opportunity to parallelise cacheline transfers with N cachelines than with 1. A worst-case test of 1 CPU allocating files subsequently being freed by N CPUs degenerates to contending on a single lock, which is no worse than before. When more than one CPU are allocating files, even if they are always freed by different CPUs, there will be more parallelism than the single-lock case. Testing results: On a 2 socket, 8 core opteron, I measure the number of times the lock is taken to remove the file, the number of times it is removed by the same CPU that added it, and the number of times it is removed by the same node that added it. Booting: locks= 25049 cpu-hits= 23174 (92.5%) node-hits= 23945 (95.6%) kbuild -j16 locks=2281913 cpu-hits=2208126 (96.8%) node-hits=2252674 (98.7%) dbench 64 locks=4306582 cpu-hits=4287247 (99.6%) node-hits=4299527 (99.8%) So a file is removed from the same CPU it was added by over 90% of the time. It remains within the same node 95% of the time. Tim Chen ran some numbers for a 64 thread Nehalem system performing a compile. throughput 2.6.34-rc2 24.5 +patch 24.9 us sys idle IO wait (in %) 2.6.34-rc2 51.25 28.25 17.25 3.25 +patch 53.75 18.5 19 8.75 So significantly less CPU time spent in kernel code, higher idle time and slightly higher throughput. Single threaded performance difference was within the noise of microbenchmarks. That is not to say penalty does not exist, the code is larger and more memory accesses required so it will be slightly slower. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2010-08-18 02:37:38 +08:00
static inline int file_list_cpu(struct file *file)
{
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
return file->f_sb_list_cpu;
#else
return smp_processor_id();
#endif
}
/* helper for file_sb_list_add to reduce ifdefs */
static inline void __file_sb_list_add(struct file *file, struct super_block *sb)
{
struct list_head *list;
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
int cpu;
cpu = smp_processor_id();
file->f_sb_list_cpu = cpu;
list = per_cpu_ptr(sb->s_files, cpu);
#else
list = &sb->s_files;
#endif
list_add(&file->f_u.fu_list, list);
}
/**
* file_sb_list_add - add a file to the sb's file list
* @file: file to add
* @sb: sb to add it to
*
* Use this function to associate a file with the superblock of the inode it
* refers to.
*/
void file_sb_list_add(struct file *file, struct super_block *sb)
{
fs: scale files_lock fs: scale files_lock Improve scalability of files_lock by adding per-cpu, per-sb files lists, protected with an lglock. The lglock provides fast access to the per-cpu lists to add and remove files. It also provides a snapshot of all the per-cpu lists (although this is very slow). One difficulty with this approach is that a file can be removed from the list by another CPU. We must track which per-cpu list the file is on with a new variale in the file struct (packed into a hole on 64-bit archs). Scalability could suffer if files are frequently removed from different cpu's list. However loads with frequent removal of files imply short interval between adding and removing the files, and the scheduler attempts to avoid moving processes too far away. Also, even in the case of cross-CPU removal, the hardware has much more opportunity to parallelise cacheline transfers with N cachelines than with 1. A worst-case test of 1 CPU allocating files subsequently being freed by N CPUs degenerates to contending on a single lock, which is no worse than before. When more than one CPU are allocating files, even if they are always freed by different CPUs, there will be more parallelism than the single-lock case. Testing results: On a 2 socket, 8 core opteron, I measure the number of times the lock is taken to remove the file, the number of times it is removed by the same CPU that added it, and the number of times it is removed by the same node that added it. Booting: locks= 25049 cpu-hits= 23174 (92.5%) node-hits= 23945 (95.6%) kbuild -j16 locks=2281913 cpu-hits=2208126 (96.8%) node-hits=2252674 (98.7%) dbench 64 locks=4306582 cpu-hits=4287247 (99.6%) node-hits=4299527 (99.8%) So a file is removed from the same CPU it was added by over 90% of the time. It remains within the same node 95% of the time. Tim Chen ran some numbers for a 64 thread Nehalem system performing a compile. throughput 2.6.34-rc2 24.5 +patch 24.9 us sys idle IO wait (in %) 2.6.34-rc2 51.25 28.25 17.25 3.25 +patch 53.75 18.5 19 8.75 So significantly less CPU time spent in kernel code, higher idle time and slightly higher throughput. Single threaded performance difference was within the noise of microbenchmarks. That is not to say penalty does not exist, the code is larger and more memory accesses required so it will be slightly slower. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2010-08-18 02:37:38 +08:00
lg_local_lock(files_lglock);
__file_sb_list_add(file, sb);
lg_local_unlock(files_lglock);
}
fs: scale files_lock fs: scale files_lock Improve scalability of files_lock by adding per-cpu, per-sb files lists, protected with an lglock. The lglock provides fast access to the per-cpu lists to add and remove files. It also provides a snapshot of all the per-cpu lists (although this is very slow). One difficulty with this approach is that a file can be removed from the list by another CPU. We must track which per-cpu list the file is on with a new variale in the file struct (packed into a hole on 64-bit archs). Scalability could suffer if files are frequently removed from different cpu's list. However loads with frequent removal of files imply short interval between adding and removing the files, and the scheduler attempts to avoid moving processes too far away. Also, even in the case of cross-CPU removal, the hardware has much more opportunity to parallelise cacheline transfers with N cachelines than with 1. A worst-case test of 1 CPU allocating files subsequently being freed by N CPUs degenerates to contending on a single lock, which is no worse than before. When more than one CPU are allocating files, even if they are always freed by different CPUs, there will be more parallelism than the single-lock case. Testing results: On a 2 socket, 8 core opteron, I measure the number of times the lock is taken to remove the file, the number of times it is removed by the same CPU that added it, and the number of times it is removed by the same node that added it. Booting: locks= 25049 cpu-hits= 23174 (92.5%) node-hits= 23945 (95.6%) kbuild -j16 locks=2281913 cpu-hits=2208126 (96.8%) node-hits=2252674 (98.7%) dbench 64 locks=4306582 cpu-hits=4287247 (99.6%) node-hits=4299527 (99.8%) So a file is removed from the same CPU it was added by over 90% of the time. It remains within the same node 95% of the time. Tim Chen ran some numbers for a 64 thread Nehalem system performing a compile. throughput 2.6.34-rc2 24.5 +patch 24.9 us sys idle IO wait (in %) 2.6.34-rc2 51.25 28.25 17.25 3.25 +patch 53.75 18.5 19 8.75 So significantly less CPU time spent in kernel code, higher idle time and slightly higher throughput. Single threaded performance difference was within the noise of microbenchmarks. That is not to say penalty does not exist, the code is larger and more memory accesses required so it will be slightly slower. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2010-08-18 02:37:38 +08:00
/**
* file_sb_list_del - remove a file from the sb's file list
* @file: file to remove
* @sb: sb to remove it from
*
* Use this function to remove a file from its superblock.
*/
void file_sb_list_del(struct file *file)
{
if (!list_empty(&file->f_u.fu_list)) {
fs: scale files_lock fs: scale files_lock Improve scalability of files_lock by adding per-cpu, per-sb files lists, protected with an lglock. The lglock provides fast access to the per-cpu lists to add and remove files. It also provides a snapshot of all the per-cpu lists (although this is very slow). One difficulty with this approach is that a file can be removed from the list by another CPU. We must track which per-cpu list the file is on with a new variale in the file struct (packed into a hole on 64-bit archs). Scalability could suffer if files are frequently removed from different cpu's list. However loads with frequent removal of files imply short interval between adding and removing the files, and the scheduler attempts to avoid moving processes too far away. Also, even in the case of cross-CPU removal, the hardware has much more opportunity to parallelise cacheline transfers with N cachelines than with 1. A worst-case test of 1 CPU allocating files subsequently being freed by N CPUs degenerates to contending on a single lock, which is no worse than before. When more than one CPU are allocating files, even if they are always freed by different CPUs, there will be more parallelism than the single-lock case. Testing results: On a 2 socket, 8 core opteron, I measure the number of times the lock is taken to remove the file, the number of times it is removed by the same CPU that added it, and the number of times it is removed by the same node that added it. Booting: locks= 25049 cpu-hits= 23174 (92.5%) node-hits= 23945 (95.6%) kbuild -j16 locks=2281913 cpu-hits=2208126 (96.8%) node-hits=2252674 (98.7%) dbench 64 locks=4306582 cpu-hits=4287247 (99.6%) node-hits=4299527 (99.8%) So a file is removed from the same CPU it was added by over 90% of the time. It remains within the same node 95% of the time. Tim Chen ran some numbers for a 64 thread Nehalem system performing a compile. throughput 2.6.34-rc2 24.5 +patch 24.9 us sys idle IO wait (in %) 2.6.34-rc2 51.25 28.25 17.25 3.25 +patch 53.75 18.5 19 8.75 So significantly less CPU time spent in kernel code, higher idle time and slightly higher throughput. Single threaded performance difference was within the noise of microbenchmarks. That is not to say penalty does not exist, the code is larger and more memory accesses required so it will be slightly slower. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2010-08-18 02:37:38 +08:00
lg_local_lock_cpu(files_lglock, file_list_cpu(file));
list_del_init(&file->f_u.fu_list);
fs: scale files_lock fs: scale files_lock Improve scalability of files_lock by adding per-cpu, per-sb files lists, protected with an lglock. The lglock provides fast access to the per-cpu lists to add and remove files. It also provides a snapshot of all the per-cpu lists (although this is very slow). One difficulty with this approach is that a file can be removed from the list by another CPU. We must track which per-cpu list the file is on with a new variale in the file struct (packed into a hole on 64-bit archs). Scalability could suffer if files are frequently removed from different cpu's list. However loads with frequent removal of files imply short interval between adding and removing the files, and the scheduler attempts to avoid moving processes too far away. Also, even in the case of cross-CPU removal, the hardware has much more opportunity to parallelise cacheline transfers with N cachelines than with 1. A worst-case test of 1 CPU allocating files subsequently being freed by N CPUs degenerates to contending on a single lock, which is no worse than before. When more than one CPU are allocating files, even if they are always freed by different CPUs, there will be more parallelism than the single-lock case. Testing results: On a 2 socket, 8 core opteron, I measure the number of times the lock is taken to remove the file, the number of times it is removed by the same CPU that added it, and the number of times it is removed by the same node that added it. Booting: locks= 25049 cpu-hits= 23174 (92.5%) node-hits= 23945 (95.6%) kbuild -j16 locks=2281913 cpu-hits=2208126 (96.8%) node-hits=2252674 (98.7%) dbench 64 locks=4306582 cpu-hits=4287247 (99.6%) node-hits=4299527 (99.8%) So a file is removed from the same CPU it was added by over 90% of the time. It remains within the same node 95% of the time. Tim Chen ran some numbers for a 64 thread Nehalem system performing a compile. throughput 2.6.34-rc2 24.5 +patch 24.9 us sys idle IO wait (in %) 2.6.34-rc2 51.25 28.25 17.25 3.25 +patch 53.75 18.5 19 8.75 So significantly less CPU time spent in kernel code, higher idle time and slightly higher throughput. Single threaded performance difference was within the noise of microbenchmarks. That is not to say penalty does not exist, the code is larger and more memory accesses required so it will be slightly slower. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2010-08-18 02:37:38 +08:00
lg_local_unlock_cpu(files_lglock, file_list_cpu(file));
}
}
fs: scale files_lock fs: scale files_lock Improve scalability of files_lock by adding per-cpu, per-sb files lists, protected with an lglock. The lglock provides fast access to the per-cpu lists to add and remove files. It also provides a snapshot of all the per-cpu lists (although this is very slow). One difficulty with this approach is that a file can be removed from the list by another CPU. We must track which per-cpu list the file is on with a new variale in the file struct (packed into a hole on 64-bit archs). Scalability could suffer if files are frequently removed from different cpu's list. However loads with frequent removal of files imply short interval between adding and removing the files, and the scheduler attempts to avoid moving processes too far away. Also, even in the case of cross-CPU removal, the hardware has much more opportunity to parallelise cacheline transfers with N cachelines than with 1. A worst-case test of 1 CPU allocating files subsequently being freed by N CPUs degenerates to contending on a single lock, which is no worse than before. When more than one CPU are allocating files, even if they are always freed by different CPUs, there will be more parallelism than the single-lock case. Testing results: On a 2 socket, 8 core opteron, I measure the number of times the lock is taken to remove the file, the number of times it is removed by the same CPU that added it, and the number of times it is removed by the same node that added it. Booting: locks= 25049 cpu-hits= 23174 (92.5%) node-hits= 23945 (95.6%) kbuild -j16 locks=2281913 cpu-hits=2208126 (96.8%) node-hits=2252674 (98.7%) dbench 64 locks=4306582 cpu-hits=4287247 (99.6%) node-hits=4299527 (99.8%) So a file is removed from the same CPU it was added by over 90% of the time. It remains within the same node 95% of the time. Tim Chen ran some numbers for a 64 thread Nehalem system performing a compile. throughput 2.6.34-rc2 24.5 +patch 24.9 us sys idle IO wait (in %) 2.6.34-rc2 51.25 28.25 17.25 3.25 +patch 53.75 18.5 19 8.75 So significantly less CPU time spent in kernel code, higher idle time and slightly higher throughput. Single threaded performance difference was within the noise of microbenchmarks. That is not to say penalty does not exist, the code is larger and more memory accesses required so it will be slightly slower. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2010-08-18 02:37:38 +08:00
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
/*
* These macros iterate all files on all CPUs for a given superblock.
* files_lglock must be held globally.
*/
#define do_file_list_for_each_entry(__sb, __file) \
{ \
int i; \
for_each_possible_cpu(i) { \
struct list_head *list; \
list = per_cpu_ptr((__sb)->s_files, i); \
list_for_each_entry((__file), list, f_u.fu_list)
#define while_file_list_for_each_entry \
} \
}
#else
#define do_file_list_for_each_entry(__sb, __file) \
{ \
struct list_head *list; \
list = &(sb)->s_files; \
list_for_each_entry((__file), list, f_u.fu_list)
#define while_file_list_for_each_entry \
}
#endif
int fs_may_remount_ro(struct super_block *sb)
{
struct file *file;
/* Check that no files are currently opened for writing. */
fs: scale files_lock fs: scale files_lock Improve scalability of files_lock by adding per-cpu, per-sb files lists, protected with an lglock. The lglock provides fast access to the per-cpu lists to add and remove files. It also provides a snapshot of all the per-cpu lists (although this is very slow). One difficulty with this approach is that a file can be removed from the list by another CPU. We must track which per-cpu list the file is on with a new variale in the file struct (packed into a hole on 64-bit archs). Scalability could suffer if files are frequently removed from different cpu's list. However loads with frequent removal of files imply short interval between adding and removing the files, and the scheduler attempts to avoid moving processes too far away. Also, even in the case of cross-CPU removal, the hardware has much more opportunity to parallelise cacheline transfers with N cachelines than with 1. A worst-case test of 1 CPU allocating files subsequently being freed by N CPUs degenerates to contending on a single lock, which is no worse than before. When more than one CPU are allocating files, even if they are always freed by different CPUs, there will be more parallelism than the single-lock case. Testing results: On a 2 socket, 8 core opteron, I measure the number of times the lock is taken to remove the file, the number of times it is removed by the same CPU that added it, and the number of times it is removed by the same node that added it. Booting: locks= 25049 cpu-hits= 23174 (92.5%) node-hits= 23945 (95.6%) kbuild -j16 locks=2281913 cpu-hits=2208126 (96.8%) node-hits=2252674 (98.7%) dbench 64 locks=4306582 cpu-hits=4287247 (99.6%) node-hits=4299527 (99.8%) So a file is removed from the same CPU it was added by over 90% of the time. It remains within the same node 95% of the time. Tim Chen ran some numbers for a 64 thread Nehalem system performing a compile. throughput 2.6.34-rc2 24.5 +patch 24.9 us sys idle IO wait (in %) 2.6.34-rc2 51.25 28.25 17.25 3.25 +patch 53.75 18.5 19 8.75 So significantly less CPU time spent in kernel code, higher idle time and slightly higher throughput. Single threaded performance difference was within the noise of microbenchmarks. That is not to say penalty does not exist, the code is larger and more memory accesses required so it will be slightly slower. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2010-08-18 02:37:38 +08:00
lg_global_lock(files_lglock);
do_file_list_for_each_entry(sb, file) {
struct inode *inode = file->f_path.dentry->d_inode;
/* File with pending delete? */
if (inode->i_nlink == 0)
goto too_bad;
/* Writeable file? */
if (S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && (file->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE))
goto too_bad;
fs: scale files_lock fs: scale files_lock Improve scalability of files_lock by adding per-cpu, per-sb files lists, protected with an lglock. The lglock provides fast access to the per-cpu lists to add and remove files. It also provides a snapshot of all the per-cpu lists (although this is very slow). One difficulty with this approach is that a file can be removed from the list by another CPU. We must track which per-cpu list the file is on with a new variale in the file struct (packed into a hole on 64-bit archs). Scalability could suffer if files are frequently removed from different cpu's list. However loads with frequent removal of files imply short interval between adding and removing the files, and the scheduler attempts to avoid moving processes too far away. Also, even in the case of cross-CPU removal, the hardware has much more opportunity to parallelise cacheline transfers with N cachelines than with 1. A worst-case test of 1 CPU allocating files subsequently being freed by N CPUs degenerates to contending on a single lock, which is no worse than before. When more than one CPU are allocating files, even if they are always freed by different CPUs, there will be more parallelism than the single-lock case. Testing results: On a 2 socket, 8 core opteron, I measure the number of times the lock is taken to remove the file, the number of times it is removed by the same CPU that added it, and the number of times it is removed by the same node that added it. Booting: locks= 25049 cpu-hits= 23174 (92.5%) node-hits= 23945 (95.6%) kbuild -j16 locks=2281913 cpu-hits=2208126 (96.8%) node-hits=2252674 (98.7%) dbench 64 locks=4306582 cpu-hits=4287247 (99.6%) node-hits=4299527 (99.8%) So a file is removed from the same CPU it was added by over 90% of the time. It remains within the same node 95% of the time. Tim Chen ran some numbers for a 64 thread Nehalem system performing a compile. throughput 2.6.34-rc2 24.5 +patch 24.9 us sys idle IO wait (in %) 2.6.34-rc2 51.25 28.25 17.25 3.25 +patch 53.75 18.5 19 8.75 So significantly less CPU time spent in kernel code, higher idle time and slightly higher throughput. Single threaded performance difference was within the noise of microbenchmarks. That is not to say penalty does not exist, the code is larger and more memory accesses required so it will be slightly slower. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2010-08-18 02:37:38 +08:00
} while_file_list_for_each_entry;
lg_global_unlock(files_lglock);
return 1; /* Tis' cool bro. */
too_bad:
fs: scale files_lock fs: scale files_lock Improve scalability of files_lock by adding per-cpu, per-sb files lists, protected with an lglock. The lglock provides fast access to the per-cpu lists to add and remove files. It also provides a snapshot of all the per-cpu lists (although this is very slow). One difficulty with this approach is that a file can be removed from the list by another CPU. We must track which per-cpu list the file is on with a new variale in the file struct (packed into a hole on 64-bit archs). Scalability could suffer if files are frequently removed from different cpu's list. However loads with frequent removal of files imply short interval between adding and removing the files, and the scheduler attempts to avoid moving processes too far away. Also, even in the case of cross-CPU removal, the hardware has much more opportunity to parallelise cacheline transfers with N cachelines than with 1. A worst-case test of 1 CPU allocating files subsequently being freed by N CPUs degenerates to contending on a single lock, which is no worse than before. When more than one CPU are allocating files, even if they are always freed by different CPUs, there will be more parallelism than the single-lock case. Testing results: On a 2 socket, 8 core opteron, I measure the number of times the lock is taken to remove the file, the number of times it is removed by the same CPU that added it, and the number of times it is removed by the same node that added it. Booting: locks= 25049 cpu-hits= 23174 (92.5%) node-hits= 23945 (95.6%) kbuild -j16 locks=2281913 cpu-hits=2208126 (96.8%) node-hits=2252674 (98.7%) dbench 64 locks=4306582 cpu-hits=4287247 (99.6%) node-hits=4299527 (99.8%) So a file is removed from the same CPU it was added by over 90% of the time. It remains within the same node 95% of the time. Tim Chen ran some numbers for a 64 thread Nehalem system performing a compile. throughput 2.6.34-rc2 24.5 +patch 24.9 us sys idle IO wait (in %) 2.6.34-rc2 51.25 28.25 17.25 3.25 +patch 53.75 18.5 19 8.75 So significantly less CPU time spent in kernel code, higher idle time and slightly higher throughput. Single threaded performance difference was within the noise of microbenchmarks. That is not to say penalty does not exist, the code is larger and more memory accesses required so it will be slightly slower. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2010-08-18 02:37:38 +08:00
lg_global_unlock(files_lglock);
return 0;
}
/**
* mark_files_ro - mark all files read-only
* @sb: superblock in question
*
* All files are marked read-only. We don't care about pending
* delete files so this should be used in 'force' mode only.
*/
void mark_files_ro(struct super_block *sb)
{
struct file *f;
retry:
fs: scale files_lock fs: scale files_lock Improve scalability of files_lock by adding per-cpu, per-sb files lists, protected with an lglock. The lglock provides fast access to the per-cpu lists to add and remove files. It also provides a snapshot of all the per-cpu lists (although this is very slow). One difficulty with this approach is that a file can be removed from the list by another CPU. We must track which per-cpu list the file is on with a new variale in the file struct (packed into a hole on 64-bit archs). Scalability could suffer if files are frequently removed from different cpu's list. However loads with frequent removal of files imply short interval between adding and removing the files, and the scheduler attempts to avoid moving processes too far away. Also, even in the case of cross-CPU removal, the hardware has much more opportunity to parallelise cacheline transfers with N cachelines than with 1. A worst-case test of 1 CPU allocating files subsequently being freed by N CPUs degenerates to contending on a single lock, which is no worse than before. When more than one CPU are allocating files, even if they are always freed by different CPUs, there will be more parallelism than the single-lock case. Testing results: On a 2 socket, 8 core opteron, I measure the number of times the lock is taken to remove the file, the number of times it is removed by the same CPU that added it, and the number of times it is removed by the same node that added it. Booting: locks= 25049 cpu-hits= 23174 (92.5%) node-hits= 23945 (95.6%) kbuild -j16 locks=2281913 cpu-hits=2208126 (96.8%) node-hits=2252674 (98.7%) dbench 64 locks=4306582 cpu-hits=4287247 (99.6%) node-hits=4299527 (99.8%) So a file is removed from the same CPU it was added by over 90% of the time. It remains within the same node 95% of the time. Tim Chen ran some numbers for a 64 thread Nehalem system performing a compile. throughput 2.6.34-rc2 24.5 +patch 24.9 us sys idle IO wait (in %) 2.6.34-rc2 51.25 28.25 17.25 3.25 +patch 53.75 18.5 19 8.75 So significantly less CPU time spent in kernel code, higher idle time and slightly higher throughput. Single threaded performance difference was within the noise of microbenchmarks. That is not to say penalty does not exist, the code is larger and more memory accesses required so it will be slightly slower. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2010-08-18 02:37:38 +08:00
lg_global_lock(files_lglock);
do_file_list_for_each_entry(sb, f) {
struct vfsmount *mnt;
if (!S_ISREG(f->f_path.dentry->d_inode->i_mode))
continue;
if (!file_count(f))
continue;
if (!(f->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE))
continue;
spin_lock(&f->f_lock);
f->f_mode &= ~FMODE_WRITE;
spin_unlock(&f->f_lock);
if (file_check_writeable(f) != 0)
continue;
file_release_write(f);
mnt = mntget(f->f_path.mnt);
/* This can sleep, so we can't hold the spinlock. */
fs: scale files_lock fs: scale files_lock Improve scalability of files_lock by adding per-cpu, per-sb files lists, protected with an lglock. The lglock provides fast access to the per-cpu lists to add and remove files. It also provides a snapshot of all the per-cpu lists (although this is very slow). One difficulty with this approach is that a file can be removed from the list by another CPU. We must track which per-cpu list the file is on with a new variale in the file struct (packed into a hole on 64-bit archs). Scalability could suffer if files are frequently removed from different cpu's list. However loads with frequent removal of files imply short interval between adding and removing the files, and the scheduler attempts to avoid moving processes too far away. Also, even in the case of cross-CPU removal, the hardware has much more opportunity to parallelise cacheline transfers with N cachelines than with 1. A worst-case test of 1 CPU allocating files subsequently being freed by N CPUs degenerates to contending on a single lock, which is no worse than before. When more than one CPU are allocating files, even if they are always freed by different CPUs, there will be more parallelism than the single-lock case. Testing results: On a 2 socket, 8 core opteron, I measure the number of times the lock is taken to remove the file, the number of times it is removed by the same CPU that added it, and the number of times it is removed by the same node that added it. Booting: locks= 25049 cpu-hits= 23174 (92.5%) node-hits= 23945 (95.6%) kbuild -j16 locks=2281913 cpu-hits=2208126 (96.8%) node-hits=2252674 (98.7%) dbench 64 locks=4306582 cpu-hits=4287247 (99.6%) node-hits=4299527 (99.8%) So a file is removed from the same CPU it was added by over 90% of the time. It remains within the same node 95% of the time. Tim Chen ran some numbers for a 64 thread Nehalem system performing a compile. throughput 2.6.34-rc2 24.5 +patch 24.9 us sys idle IO wait (in %) 2.6.34-rc2 51.25 28.25 17.25 3.25 +patch 53.75 18.5 19 8.75 So significantly less CPU time spent in kernel code, higher idle time and slightly higher throughput. Single threaded performance difference was within the noise of microbenchmarks. That is not to say penalty does not exist, the code is larger and more memory accesses required so it will be slightly slower. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2010-08-18 02:37:38 +08:00
lg_global_unlock(files_lglock);
mnt_drop_write(mnt);
mntput(mnt);
goto retry;
fs: scale files_lock fs: scale files_lock Improve scalability of files_lock by adding per-cpu, per-sb files lists, protected with an lglock. The lglock provides fast access to the per-cpu lists to add and remove files. It also provides a snapshot of all the per-cpu lists (although this is very slow). One difficulty with this approach is that a file can be removed from the list by another CPU. We must track which per-cpu list the file is on with a new variale in the file struct (packed into a hole on 64-bit archs). Scalability could suffer if files are frequently removed from different cpu's list. However loads with frequent removal of files imply short interval between adding and removing the files, and the scheduler attempts to avoid moving processes too far away. Also, even in the case of cross-CPU removal, the hardware has much more opportunity to parallelise cacheline transfers with N cachelines than with 1. A worst-case test of 1 CPU allocating files subsequently being freed by N CPUs degenerates to contending on a single lock, which is no worse than before. When more than one CPU are allocating files, even if they are always freed by different CPUs, there will be more parallelism than the single-lock case. Testing results: On a 2 socket, 8 core opteron, I measure the number of times the lock is taken to remove the file, the number of times it is removed by the same CPU that added it, and the number of times it is removed by the same node that added it. Booting: locks= 25049 cpu-hits= 23174 (92.5%) node-hits= 23945 (95.6%) kbuild -j16 locks=2281913 cpu-hits=2208126 (96.8%) node-hits=2252674 (98.7%) dbench 64 locks=4306582 cpu-hits=4287247 (99.6%) node-hits=4299527 (99.8%) So a file is removed from the same CPU it was added by over 90% of the time. It remains within the same node 95% of the time. Tim Chen ran some numbers for a 64 thread Nehalem system performing a compile. throughput 2.6.34-rc2 24.5 +patch 24.9 us sys idle IO wait (in %) 2.6.34-rc2 51.25 28.25 17.25 3.25 +patch 53.75 18.5 19 8.75 So significantly less CPU time spent in kernel code, higher idle time and slightly higher throughput. Single threaded performance difference was within the noise of microbenchmarks. That is not to say penalty does not exist, the code is larger and more memory accesses required so it will be slightly slower. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2010-08-18 02:37:38 +08:00
} while_file_list_for_each_entry;
lg_global_unlock(files_lglock);
}
void __init files_init(unsigned long mempages)
{
int n;
filp_cachep = kmem_cache_create("filp", sizeof(struct file), 0,
SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN | SLAB_PANIC, NULL);
/*
* One file with associated inode and dcache is very roughly 1K.
* Per default don't use more than 10% of our memory for files.
*/
n = (mempages * (PAGE_SIZE / 1024)) / 10;
files_stat.max_files = n;
if (files_stat.max_files < NR_FILE)
files_stat.max_files = NR_FILE;
files_defer_init();
fs: scale files_lock fs: scale files_lock Improve scalability of files_lock by adding per-cpu, per-sb files lists, protected with an lglock. The lglock provides fast access to the per-cpu lists to add and remove files. It also provides a snapshot of all the per-cpu lists (although this is very slow). One difficulty with this approach is that a file can be removed from the list by another CPU. We must track which per-cpu list the file is on with a new variale in the file struct (packed into a hole on 64-bit archs). Scalability could suffer if files are frequently removed from different cpu's list. However loads with frequent removal of files imply short interval between adding and removing the files, and the scheduler attempts to avoid moving processes too far away. Also, even in the case of cross-CPU removal, the hardware has much more opportunity to parallelise cacheline transfers with N cachelines than with 1. A worst-case test of 1 CPU allocating files subsequently being freed by N CPUs degenerates to contending on a single lock, which is no worse than before. When more than one CPU are allocating files, even if they are always freed by different CPUs, there will be more parallelism than the single-lock case. Testing results: On a 2 socket, 8 core opteron, I measure the number of times the lock is taken to remove the file, the number of times it is removed by the same CPU that added it, and the number of times it is removed by the same node that added it. Booting: locks= 25049 cpu-hits= 23174 (92.5%) node-hits= 23945 (95.6%) kbuild -j16 locks=2281913 cpu-hits=2208126 (96.8%) node-hits=2252674 (98.7%) dbench 64 locks=4306582 cpu-hits=4287247 (99.6%) node-hits=4299527 (99.8%) So a file is removed from the same CPU it was added by over 90% of the time. It remains within the same node 95% of the time. Tim Chen ran some numbers for a 64 thread Nehalem system performing a compile. throughput 2.6.34-rc2 24.5 +patch 24.9 us sys idle IO wait (in %) 2.6.34-rc2 51.25 28.25 17.25 3.25 +patch 53.75 18.5 19 8.75 So significantly less CPU time spent in kernel code, higher idle time and slightly higher throughput. Single threaded performance difference was within the noise of microbenchmarks. That is not to say penalty does not exist, the code is larger and more memory accesses required so it will be slightly slower. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2010-08-18 02:37:38 +08:00
lg_lock_init(files_lglock);
percpu_counter_init(&nr_files, 0);
}