dentry-locking.txt 8.1 KB

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172
  1. RCU-based dcache locking model
  2. ==============================
  3. On many workloads, the most common operation on dcache is to look up a
  4. dentry, given a parent dentry and the name of the child. Typically,
  5. for every open(), stat() etc., the dentry corresponding to the
  6. pathname will be looked up by walking the tree starting with the first
  7. component of the pathname and using that dentry along with the next
  8. component to look up the next level and so on. Since it is a frequent
  9. operation for workloads like multiuser environments and web servers,
  10. it is important to optimize this path.
  11. Prior to 2.5.10, dcache_lock was acquired in d_lookup and thus in
  12. every component during path look-up. Since 2.5.10 onwards, fast-walk
  13. algorithm changed this by holding the dcache_lock at the beginning and
  14. walking as many cached path component dentries as possible. This
  15. significantly decreases the number of acquisition of
  16. dcache_lock. However it also increases the lock hold time
  17. significantly and affects performance in large SMP machines. Since
  18. 2.5.62 kernel, dcache has been using a new locking model that uses RCU
  19. to make dcache look-up lock-free.
  20. The current dcache locking model is not very different from the
  21. existing dcache locking model. Prior to 2.5.62 kernel, dcache_lock
  22. protected the hash chain, d_child, d_alias, d_lru lists as well as
  23. d_inode and several other things like mount look-up. RCU-based changes
  24. affect only the way the hash chain is protected. For everything else
  25. the dcache_lock must be taken for both traversing as well as
  26. updating. The hash chain updates too take the dcache_lock. The
  27. significant change is the way d_lookup traverses the hash chain, it
  28. doesn't acquire the dcache_lock for this and rely on RCU to ensure
  29. that the dentry has not been *freed*.
  30. dcache_lock no longer exists, dentry locking is explained in fs/dcache.c
  31. Dcache locking details
  32. ======================
  33. For many multi-user workloads, open() and stat() on files are very
  34. frequently occurring operations. Both involve walking of path names to
  35. find the dentry corresponding to the concerned file. In 2.4 kernel,
  36. dcache_lock was held during look-up of each path component. Contention
  37. and cache-line bouncing of this global lock caused significant
  38. scalability problems. With the introduction of RCU in Linux kernel,
  39. this was worked around by making the look-up of path components during
  40. path walking lock-free.
  41. Safe lock-free look-up of dcache hash table
  42. ===========================================
  43. Dcache is a complex data structure with the hash table entries also
  44. linked together in other lists. In 2.4 kernel, dcache_lock protected
  45. all the lists. RCU dentry hash walking works like this:
  46. 1. The deletion from hash chain is done using hlist_del_rcu() macro
  47. which doesn't initialize next pointer of the deleted dentry and
  48. this allows us to walk safely lock-free while a deletion is
  49. happening. This is a standard hlist_rcu iteration.
  50. 2. Insertion of a dentry into the hash table is done using
  51. hlist_add_head_rcu() which take care of ordering the writes - the
  52. writes to the dentry must be visible before the dentry is
  53. inserted. This works in conjunction with hlist_for_each_rcu(),
  54. which has since been replaced by hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(), while
  55. walking the hash chain. The only requirement is that all
  56. initialization to the dentry must be done before
  57. hlist_add_head_rcu() since we don't have lock protection
  58. while traversing the hash chain.
  59. 3. The dentry looked up without holding locks cannot be returned for
  60. walking if it is unhashed. It then may have a NULL d_inode or other
  61. bogosity since RCU doesn't protect the other fields in the dentry. We
  62. therefore use a flag DCACHE_UNHASHED to indicate unhashed dentries
  63. and use this in conjunction with a per-dentry lock (d_lock). Once
  64. looked up without locks, we acquire the per-dentry lock (d_lock) and
  65. check if the dentry is unhashed. If so, the look-up is failed. If not,
  66. the reference count of the dentry is increased and the dentry is
  67. returned.
  68. 4. Once a dentry is looked up, it must be ensured during the path walk
  69. for that component it doesn't go away. In pre-2.5.10 code, this was
  70. done holding a reference to the dentry. dcache_rcu does the same.
  71. In some sense, dcache_rcu path walking looks like the pre-2.5.10
  72. version.
  73. 5. All dentry hash chain updates must take the per-dentry lock (see
  74. fs/dcache.c). This excludes dput() to ensure that a dentry that has
  75. been looked up concurrently does not get deleted before dget() can
  76. take a ref.
  77. 6. There are several ways to do reference counting of RCU protected
  78. objects. One such example is in ipv4 route cache where deferred
  79. freeing (using call_rcu()) is done as soon as the reference count
  80. goes to zero. This cannot be done in the case of dentries because
  81. tearing down of dentries require blocking (dentry_iput()) which
  82. isn't supported from RCU callbacks. Instead, tearing down of
  83. dentries happen synchronously in dput(), but actual freeing happens
  84. later when RCU grace period is over. This allows safe lock-free
  85. walking of the hash chains, but a matched dentry may have been
  86. partially torn down. The checking of DCACHE_UNHASHED flag with
  87. d_lock held detects such dentries and prevents them from being
  88. returned from look-up.
  89. Maintaining POSIX rename semantics
  90. ==================================
  91. Since look-up of dentries is lock-free, it can race against a
  92. concurrent rename operation. For example, during rename of file A to
  93. B, look-up of either A or B must succeed. So, if look-up of B happens
  94. after A has been removed from the hash chain but not added to the new
  95. hash chain, it may fail. Also, a comparison while the name is being
  96. written concurrently by a rename may result in false positive matches
  97. violating rename semantics. Issues related to race with rename are
  98. handled as described below :
  99. 1. Look-up can be done in two ways - d_lookup() which is safe from
  100. simultaneous renames and __d_lookup() which is not. If
  101. __d_lookup() fails, it must be followed up by a d_lookup() to
  102. correctly determine whether a dentry is in the hash table or
  103. not. d_lookup() protects look-ups using a sequence lock
  104. (rename_lock).
  105. 2. The name associated with a dentry (d_name) may be changed if a
  106. rename is allowed to happen simultaneously. To avoid memcmp() in
  107. __d_lookup() go out of bounds due to a rename and false positive
  108. comparison, the name comparison is done while holding the
  109. per-dentry lock. This prevents concurrent renames during this
  110. operation.
  111. 3. Hash table walking during look-up may move to a different bucket as
  112. the current dentry is moved to a different bucket due to rename.
  113. But we use hlists in dcache hash table and they are
  114. null-terminated. So, even if a dentry moves to a different bucket,
  115. hash chain walk will terminate. [with a list_head list, it may not
  116. since termination is when the list_head in the original bucket is
  117. reached]. Since we redo the d_parent check and compare name while
  118. holding d_lock, lock-free look-up will not race against d_move().
  119. 4. There can be a theoretical race when a dentry keeps coming back to
  120. original bucket due to double moves. Due to this look-up may
  121. consider that it has never moved and can end up in a infinite loop.
  122. But this is not any worse that theoretical livelocks we already
  123. have in the kernel.
  124. Important guidelines for filesystem developers related to dcache_rcu
  125. ====================================================================
  126. 1. Existing dcache interfaces (pre-2.5.62) exported to filesystem
  127. don't change. Only dcache internal implementation changes. However
  128. filesystems *must not* delete from the dentry hash chains directly
  129. using the list macros like allowed earlier. They must use dcache
  130. APIs like d_drop() or __d_drop() depending on the situation.
  131. 2. d_flags is now protected by a per-dentry lock (d_lock). All access
  132. to d_flags must be protected by it.
  133. 3. For a hashed dentry, checking of d_count needs to be protected by
  134. d_lock.
  135. Papers and other documentation on dcache locking
  136. ================================================
  137. 1. Scaling dcache with RCU (http://linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=7124).
  138. 2. http://lse.sourceforge.net/locking/dcache/dcache.html