On 08/29/2018 09:43 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 01:11:08PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 08/28/2018 08:11 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 01:19:39PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>>>> The current dentry number tracking code doesn't distinguish between
>>>> positive & negative dentries. It just reports the total number of
>>>> dentries in the LRU lists.
>>>>
>>>> As excessive number of negative dentries can have an impact on system
>>>> performance, it will be wise to track the number of positive and
>>>> negative dentries separately.
>>>>
>>>> This patch adds tracking for the total number of negative dentries in
>>>> the system LRU lists and reports it in the /proc/sys/fs/dentry-state
>>>> file. The number, however, does not include negative dentries that are
>>>> in flight but not in the LRU yet.
>>>>
>>>> The number of positive dentries in the LRU lists can be roughly found
>>>> by subtracting the number of negative dentries from the total.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> Documentation/sysctl/fs.txt | 19 +++++++++++++------
>>>> fs/dcache.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> include/linux/dcache.h | 7 ++++---
>>>> 3 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/sysctl/fs.txt b/Documentation/sysctl/fs.txt
>>>> index 819caf8..118bb93 100644
>>>> --- a/Documentation/sysctl/fs.txt
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/sysctl/fs.txt
>>>> @@ -63,19 +63,26 @@ struct {
>>>> int nr_unused;
>>>> int age_limit; /* age in seconds */
>>>> int want_pages; /* pages requested by system */
>>>> - int dummy[2];
>>>> + int nr_negative; /* # of unused negative dentries */
>>>> + int dummy;
>>>> } dentry_stat = {0, 0, 45, 0,};
>>> That's not a backwards compatible ABI change. Those dummy fields
>>> used to represent some metric we no longer calculate, and there are
>>> probably still monitoring apps out there that think they still have
>>> the old meaning. i.e. they are still visible to userspace:
>>>
>>> $ cat /proc/sys/fs/dentry-state
>>> 83090 67661 45 0 0 0
>>> $
>>>
>>> IOWs, you can add new fields for new metrics to the end of the
>>> structure, but you can't re-use existing fields even if they
>>> aren't calculated anymore.
>>>
>>> [....]
>> I looked up the git history and the state of the dentry_stat structure
>> hadn't changed since it was first put into git in 2.6.12-rc2 on Apr 16,
>> 2005. That was over 13 years ago. Even adding an extra argument can have
>> the potential of breaking old applications depending on how the parsing
>> code was written.
> I'm pretty we've had this discussion many times before w.r.t.
> /proc/self/mount* and other multi-field proc files.
>
> IIRC, The answer has always been that it's OK to extend lines with
> new fields as existing apps /should/ ignore them, but it's not OK to
> remove or redefine existing fields in the line because existing apps
> /will/ misinterpret what that field means.
>
>> Given that systems that are still using some very old tools are not
>> likely to upgrade to the latest kernel anyway. I don't see that as a big
>> problem.
> I don't think that matters when it comes to changing what
> information we expose in proc files.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
I am not against appending the new count to the end. I just want to make
sure that it is the right thing to do.
Cheers,
Longman
