From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> To: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, virtio-fs@redhat.com, miklos@szeredi.hu, stefanha@redhat.com Cc: vgoyal@redhat.com, iangelak@redhat.com, jaggel@bu.edu, dgilbert@redhat.com Subject: [PATCH 0/8] virtiofs: Notification queue and blocking posix locks Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2021 10:38:42 -0400 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20210930143850.1188628-1-vgoyal@redhat.com> (raw) Hi, As of now we do not support blocking remote posix locks with virtiofs. Well fuse client does not care but server returns -EOPNOTSUPP. There are couple of reasons to not support it yet. - If virtiofsd is single threaded or does not have a thread pool just to handle requests which can block for a long time, virtiofsd will stop processing new requests and virtiofs will come to a halt. To the extent that further unlock request will not make progress and deadlock will result. This can be taken care of by creating a custom thread pool in virtiofsd just to hanlde lock requests. - If client sends a blocking lock request and blocks, then it will consume descriptors in vring. If enough processes block, it is possible that vring does not have capacity to send more requests till some response comes back and descriptors are free. This can also lead to deadlock where an unlock request can't be sent to virtiofsd now. Also this will stop virtiofs operation as well as new filesystem requests can't be sent. To avoid this issue, idea was suggested thatn when a blocking lock request is sent by client, do not block it. Immediately send a reply saying client process should wait for a notification which will let it know once lock is available. This will make sure descriptors in virtqueue are not kept busy while we are waiting for lock and future unlock and other file system requests can continue to make progress. This first requires a notion of notification queue and virtiosfd being able to send notifications to client. This patch series implements that as well. As of now only one notification type has been implemented but now infrastructure is in place and other use cases should be easily add more type of notifications as need be. We don't yet have the capability to interrupt the process which is waiting for the posix lock. And reason for that is that virtiofs does not support capability to interrupt yet. That's a TODO item for later. Please have a look. Thanks Vivek Vivek Goyal (8): virtiofs: Disable interrupt requests properly virtiofs: Fix a comment about fuse_dev allocation virtiofs: Add an index to keep track of first request queue virtiofs: Decouple queue index and queue type virtiofs: Add a virtqueue for notifications virtiofs: Add a helper to end request and decrement inflight number virtiofs: Add new notification type FUSE_NOTIFY_LOCK virtiofs: Handle reordering of reply and notification event fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c | 438 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- include/uapi/linux/fuse.h | 11 +- include/uapi/linux/virtio_fs.h | 5 + 3 files changed, 412 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-) -- 2.31.1
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> To: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, virtio-fs@redhat.com, miklos@szeredi.hu, stefanha@redhat.com Cc: vgoyal@redhat.com Subject: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH 0/8] virtiofs: Notification queue and blocking posix locks Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2021 10:38:42 -0400 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20210930143850.1188628-1-vgoyal@redhat.com> (raw) Hi, As of now we do not support blocking remote posix locks with virtiofs. Well fuse client does not care but server returns -EOPNOTSUPP. There are couple of reasons to not support it yet. - If virtiofsd is single threaded or does not have a thread pool just to handle requests which can block for a long time, virtiofsd will stop processing new requests and virtiofs will come to a halt. To the extent that further unlock request will not make progress and deadlock will result. This can be taken care of by creating a custom thread pool in virtiofsd just to hanlde lock requests. - If client sends a blocking lock request and blocks, then it will consume descriptors in vring. If enough processes block, it is possible that vring does not have capacity to send more requests till some response comes back and descriptors are free. This can also lead to deadlock where an unlock request can't be sent to virtiofsd now. Also this will stop virtiofs operation as well as new filesystem requests can't be sent. To avoid this issue, idea was suggested thatn when a blocking lock request is sent by client, do not block it. Immediately send a reply saying client process should wait for a notification which will let it know once lock is available. This will make sure descriptors in virtqueue are not kept busy while we are waiting for lock and future unlock and other file system requests can continue to make progress. This first requires a notion of notification queue and virtiosfd being able to send notifications to client. This patch series implements that as well. As of now only one notification type has been implemented but now infrastructure is in place and other use cases should be easily add more type of notifications as need be. We don't yet have the capability to interrupt the process which is waiting for the posix lock. And reason for that is that virtiofs does not support capability to interrupt yet. That's a TODO item for later. Please have a look. Thanks Vivek Vivek Goyal (8): virtiofs: Disable interrupt requests properly virtiofs: Fix a comment about fuse_dev allocation virtiofs: Add an index to keep track of first request queue virtiofs: Decouple queue index and queue type virtiofs: Add a virtqueue for notifications virtiofs: Add a helper to end request and decrement inflight number virtiofs: Add new notification type FUSE_NOTIFY_LOCK virtiofs: Handle reordering of reply and notification event fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c | 438 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- include/uapi/linux/fuse.h | 11 +- include/uapi/linux/virtio_fs.h | 5 + 3 files changed, 412 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-) -- 2.31.1
next reply other threads:[~2021-09-30 14:39 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-09-30 14:38 Vivek Goyal [this message] 2021-09-30 14:38 ` [Virtio-fs] [PATCH 0/8] virtiofs: Notification queue and blocking posix locks Vivek Goyal 2021-09-30 14:38 ` [PATCH 1/8] virtiofs: Disable interrupt requests properly Vivek Goyal 2021-09-30 14:38 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal 2021-09-30 14:38 ` [PATCH 2/8] virtiofs: Fix a comment about fuse_dev allocation Vivek Goyal 2021-09-30 14:38 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal 2021-09-30 14:38 ` [PATCH 3/8] virtiofs: Add an index to keep track of first request queue Vivek Goyal 2021-09-30 14:38 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal 2021-09-30 14:38 ` [PATCH 4/8] virtiofs: Decouple queue index and queue type Vivek Goyal 2021-09-30 14:38 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal 2021-09-30 14:38 ` [PATCH 5/8] virtiofs: Add a virtqueue for notifications Vivek Goyal 2021-09-30 14:38 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal 2021-10-06 12:46 ` Miklos Szeredi 2021-10-06 12:46 ` [Virtio-fs] " Miklos Szeredi 2021-10-06 12:54 ` Vivek Goyal 2021-10-06 12:54 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal 2021-09-30 14:38 ` [PATCH 6/8] virtiofs: Add a helper to end request and decrement inflight number Vivek Goyal 2021-09-30 14:38 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal 2021-09-30 14:38 ` [PATCH 7/8] virtiofs: Add new notification type FUSE_NOTIFY_LOCK Vivek Goyal 2021-09-30 14:38 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal 2021-10-06 12:55 ` Miklos Szeredi 2021-10-06 12:55 ` [Virtio-fs] " Miklos Szeredi 2021-10-06 15:01 ` Vivek Goyal 2021-10-06 15:01 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal 2021-10-06 13:02 ` Miklos Szeredi 2021-10-06 13:02 ` [Virtio-fs] " Miklos Szeredi 2021-10-06 16:12 ` Vivek Goyal 2021-10-06 16:12 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal 2021-10-07 13:45 ` Miklos Szeredi 2021-10-07 13:45 ` [Virtio-fs] " Miklos Szeredi 2021-10-07 14:21 ` Vivek Goyal 2021-10-07 14:21 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal 2021-10-07 18:11 ` Miklos Szeredi 2021-10-07 18:11 ` [Virtio-fs] " Miklos Szeredi 2021-10-07 18:32 ` Vivek Goyal 2021-10-07 18:32 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal 2021-10-07 18:46 ` Miklos Szeredi 2021-10-07 18:46 ` [Virtio-fs] " Miklos Szeredi 2021-09-30 14:38 ` [PATCH 8/8] virtiofs: Handle reordering of reply and notification event Vivek Goyal 2021-09-30 14:38 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal 2021-09-30 15:43 ` [PATCH 0/8] virtiofs: Notification queue and blocking posix locks Vivek Goyal 2021-09-30 15:43 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
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=20210930143850.1188628-1-vgoyal@redhat.com \ --to=vgoyal@redhat.com \ --cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \ --cc=iangelak@redhat.com \ --cc=jaggel@bu.edu \ --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \ --cc=stefanha@redhat.com \ --cc=virtio-fs@redhat.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: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.