On Fri 02-02-18 09:54:14, Tejun Heo wrote:
> If a connection gets aborted while congested, FUSE can leave
> nr_wb_congested[] stuck until reboot causing wait_iff_congested() to
> wait spuriously which can lead to severe performance degradation.
>
> The leak is caused by gating congestion state clearing with
> fc->connected test in request_end(). This was added way back in 2009
> by 26c3679101db ("fuse: destroy bdi on umount"). While the commit
> description doesn't explain why the test was added, it most likely was
> to avoid dereferencing bdi after it got destroyed.
>
> Since then, bdi lifetime rules have changed many times and now we're
> always guaranteed to have access to the bdi while the superblock is
> alive (fc->sb).
>
> Drop fc->connected conditional to avoid leaking congestion states.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Reported-by: Joshua Miller <joshmiller@xxxxxx>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Yeah, this should be fine AFAICT but my knowledge of FUSE is very cursory.
Anyway:
Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
Honza
> ---
> fs/fuse/dev.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/fs/fuse/dev.c
> +++ b/fs/fuse/dev.c
> @@ -381,8 +381,7 @@ static void request_end(struct fuse_conn
> if (!fc->blocked && waitqueue_active(&fc->blocked_waitq))
> wake_up(&fc->blocked_waitq);
>
> - if (fc->num_background == fc->congestion_threshold &&
> - fc->connected && fc->sb) {
> + if (fc->num_background == fc->congestion_threshold && fc->sb) {
> clear_bdi_congested(fc->sb->s_bdi, BLK_RW_SYNC);
> clear_bdi_congested(fc->sb->s_bdi, BLK_RW_ASYNC);
> }
--
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
