On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 11:42:18AM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > > > > On Aug 24, 2020, at 10:22 AM, Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 09:39:31AM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > >> > >> > >>> On Aug 19, 2020, at 5:29 PM, Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 05:26:26PM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> On Aug 17, 2020, at 6:20 PM, Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sun, Aug 16, 2020 at 04:46:00PM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> In order of application: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 5920afa3c85f ("nfsd: hook nfsd_commit up to the nfsd_file cache") > >>>>>> 961.68user 5252.40system 20:12.30elapsed 512%CPU, 2541 DELAY errors > >>>>>> These results are similar to v5.3. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> fd4f83fd7dfb ("nfsd: convert nfs4_file->fi_fds array to use nfsd_files") > >>>>>> Does not build > >>>>>> > >>>>>> eb82dd393744 ("nfsd: convert fi_deleg_file and ls_file fields to nfsd_file") > >>>>>> 966.92user 5425.47system 33:52.79elapsed 314%CPU, 1330 DELAY errors > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Can you take a look and see if there's anything obvious? > >>>>> > >>>>> Unfortunately nothing about the file cache code is very obvious to me. > >>>>> I'm looking at it.... > >>>>> > >>>>> It adds some new nfserr_jukebox returns in nfsd_file_acquire. Those > >>>>> mostly look like kmalloc failures, the one I'm not sure about is the > >>>>> NFSD_FILE_HASHED check. > >>>>> > >>>>> Or maybe it's the lease break there. > >>>> > >>>> nfsd_file_acquire() always calls fh_verify() before it invokes nfsd_open(). > >>>> Replacing nfs4_get_vfs_file's nfsd_open() call with nfsd_file_acquire() adds > >>>> almost 10 million fh_verify() calls to my test run. > >>> > >>> Checking out the code as of fd4f83fd7dfb.... > >>> > >>> nfsd_file_acquire() calls nfsd_open_verified(). > >>> > >>> And nfsd_open() is basically just fh_verify()+nfsd_open_verified(). > >>> > >>> So it doesn't look like the replacement of nfsd_open() by > >>> nfsd_file_acquire() should have changed the number of fh_verify() calls. > >> > >> I see a lot more vfs_setlease() failures after fd4f83fd7dfb. > >> check_conflicting_open() fails because "inode is open for write": > >> > >> 1780 if (arg == F_RDLCK) > >> 1781 return inode_is_open_for_write(inode) ? -EAGAIN : 0; > >> > >> The behavior on the wire is that the server simply doesn't hand out > >> many delegations. > >> > >> NFSv4 OPEN uses nfsd_file_acquire() now, but I don't see CLOSE > >> releasing the cached file descriptor. Wouldn't that cached > >> descriptor conflict with subsequent OPENs? > > > > Could be, yes. > > > > That also reminds me of this patch, did I already send it to you? > > I don't have this one. I can try it. No difference, I take it? There could also be something wrong with nfsd4_check_conflicting_opens() that's preventing delegations when it shouldn't. There might also be some way fh_verify() could be smarter. There's a big comment there explaining why we repeat the permission checks each time, but maybe we could keep a flag somewhere that tracks whether we really need to call nfsd_setuser again. Based on your and Frank's experiences I'm also sympathetic to the idea that maybe the filehandle cache just gets in the way in the v4 case. --b. > > Author: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Fri Jul 17 18:54:54 2020 -0400 > > > > nfsd: Cache R, RW, and W opens separately > > > > The nfsd open code has always kept separate read-only, read-write, and > > write-only opens as necessary to ensure that when a client closes or > > downgrades, we don't retain more access than necessary. > > > > Honestly, I'm not sure if that's completely necessary, but I'd rather > > stick to that behavior. > > > > Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > diff --git a/fs/nfsd/filecache.c b/fs/nfsd/filecache.c > > index 82198d747c4c..4b6f70e0d987 100644 > > --- a/fs/nfsd/filecache.c > > +++ b/fs/nfsd/filecache.c > > @@ -891,7 +891,7 @@ nfsd_file_find_locked(struct inode *inode, unsigned int may_flags, > > > > hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(nf, &nfsd_file_hashtbl[hashval].nfb_head, > > nf_node, lockdep_is_held(&nfsd_file_hashtbl[hashval].nfb_lock)) { > > - if ((need & nf->nf_may) != need) > > + if (nf->nf_may != need) > > continue; > > if (nf->nf_inode != inode) > > continue; > > -- > Chuck Lever > >