From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
To: michael.christie@oracle.com
Cc: target-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
pbonzini@redhat.com, jasowang@redhat.com, mst@redhat.com,
sgarzare@redhat.com, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] vhost: allow userspace to create workers
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2021 16:19:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YL45CfpHyzSEcAJv@stefanha-x1.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0c1aef53-4850-8c46-0706-9b7276716e68@oracle.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3439 bytes --]
On Sat, Jun 05, 2021 at 06:53:58PM -0500, michael.christie@oracle.com wrote:
> On 6/3/21 9:30 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> >> + if (info->pid == VHOST_VRING_NEW_WORKER) {
> >> + worker = vhost_worker_create(dev);
> >
> > The maximum number of kthreads created is limited by
> > vhost_dev_init(nvqs)? For example VHOST_SCSI_MAX_VQ 128.
> >
> > IIUC kthread_create is not limited by or accounted against the current
> > task, so I'm a little worried that a process can create a lot of
> > kthreads.
> >
> > I haven't investigated other kthread_create() users reachable from
> > userspace applications to see how they bound the number of threads
> > effectively.
>
> Do we want something like io_uring's copy_process use? It's what fork uses,
> so we get checks like RLIMIT_NPROC and max_threads.
>
> I know I didn't look at everything, but it looks like for some software
> drivers we just allow the user to run wild. For example for nbd, when we
> create the device to do alloc_workqueue and use the default max_active
> value (256). We then don't have a limit on connections, so we could end
> up with 256 workqueue threads per device. And then there is no limit on
> devices a user can make.
>
>
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> >
>
> Is the concern a bad VM could create N devs each with 128 vqs/threads
> and it would slow down other VMs? How do we handle the case where
> some VM makes M * N devs and that is equal to N * 128 so we would end
> up with the same number of threads either way? Is there a limit to the
> number of vhost devices a VM can make and can I just stick in a similar
> check for workers?
>
> For vhost-scsi specifically, the 128 limit does not make a lot of sense.
> I think we want the max to be the number of vCPUs the VM has so we can
> add checks for that. Then we would assume someone making a VM with lots of
> CPUs is going to have the resources to support them.
>
> Note: It does make sense from the point of view that we don't know the
> number of vCPUs when vhost-scsi calls vhost_dev_init, so I get we had to
> select an initial limit.
My concern is that threads should probably accounted against
RLIMIT_NPROC and max_threads rather than something indirect like 128 *
RLIMIT_NOFILE (a userspace process can only have RLIMIT_NOFILE
vhost-user file descriptors open).
> >> + if (!dev->workers) {
> >> + vhost_worker_put(worker);
> >> + return -ENOMEM;
> >> + }
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + vq->worker = worker;
> >> +
> >> + dev->workers[dev->num_workers] = worker;
> >> + dev->num_workers++;
> >
> > Hmm...should we really append to workers[] in the vhost_worker_find()
> > case?
>
>
> As it's coded now, yes. Every successful vhost_worker_find call does a
> get on the worker's refcount. Later when we delete the device, we loop
> over the workers array and for every entry we do a put.
>
> I can add in some code to first check if the worker is already in the
> dev's worker list. If so then skip the refcount and skip adding to the
> workers array. If not in the dev's worker list then do a vhost_worker_find.
>
> I thought it might be nicer how it is now with the single path. It's less
> code at least. Later if we add support to change a vq's worker then we also
> don't have to worry about refcounts as much. We just always drop the count
> taken from when it was added.
Thanks for explaining.
Stefan
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-07 15:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-25 18:05 vhost: multiple worker support Mike Christie
2021-05-25 18:05 ` [PATCH 1/9] vhost: move worker thread fields to new struct Mike Christie
2021-06-03 10:16 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-05-25 18:05 ` [PATCH 2/9] vhost: move vhost worker creation to kick setup Mike Christie
2021-06-03 10:28 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-05-25 18:05 ` [PATCH 3/9] vhost: modify internal functions to take a vhost_worker Mike Christie
2021-06-03 10:45 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-05-25 18:05 ` [PATCH 4/9] vhost: allow vhost_polls to use different vhost_workers Mike Christie
2021-06-03 13:51 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-05-25 18:05 ` [PATCH 5/9] vhost-scsi: flush IO vqs then send TMF rsp Mike Christie
2021-06-03 13:54 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-05-25 18:05 ` [PATCH 6/9] vhost-scsi: make SCSI cmd completion per vq Mike Christie
2021-06-03 13:57 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-05-25 18:05 ` [PATCH 7/9] vhost: allow userspace to create workers Mike Christie
2021-06-03 14:30 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-06-05 23:53 ` michael.christie
2021-06-07 15:19 ` Stefan Hajnoczi [this message]
2021-06-09 21:03 ` Mike Christie
2021-06-10 8:06 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-06-18 2:49 ` Mike Christie
2021-06-21 13:41 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-05-25 18:05 ` [PATCH 8/9] vhost: add vhost_dev pointer to vhost_work Mike Christie
2021-06-03 14:31 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-05-25 18:06 ` [PATCH 9/9] vhost: support sharing workers across devs Mike Christie
2021-06-03 14:32 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-06-07 2:18 ` Jason Wang
2021-06-03 10:13 ` vhost: multiple worker support Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-06-03 18:45 ` Mike Christie
2021-06-03 14:37 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-06-03 22:16 ` Mike Christie
2021-06-05 22:40 ` michael.christie
2021-06-07 15:23 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
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=YL45CfpHyzSEcAJv@stefanha-x1.localdomain \
--to=stefanha@redhat.com \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michael.christie@oracle.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=sgarzare@redhat.com \
--cc=target-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).