On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 09:35:05PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx> > > When doing file lookups and checking for permissions, we end up in > xfs_get_acl() to see if there are any ACLs on the inode. This > requires and xattr lookup, and to do that we have to supply a buffer > large enough to hold an maximum sized xattr. > > On workloads were we are accessing a wide range of cache cold files > under memory pressure (e.g. NFS fileservers) we end up spending a > lot of time allocating the buffer. The buffer is 64k in length, so > is a contiguous multi-page allocation, and if that then fails we > fall back to vmalloc(). Hence the allocation here is /expensive/ > when we are looking up hundreds of thousands of files a second. > > Initial numbers from a bpf trace show average time in xfs_get_acl() > is ~32us, with ~19us of that in the memory allocation. Note these > are average times, so there are going to be affected by the worst > case allocations more than the common fast case... > > To avoid this, we could just do a "null" lookup to see if the ACL > xattr exists and then only do the allocation if it exists. This, > however, optimises the path for the "no ACL present" case at the > expense of the "acl present" case. i.e. we can halve the time in > xfs_get_acl() for the no acl case (i.e down to ~10-15us), but that > then increases the ACL case by 30% (i.e. up to 40-45us). > > To solve this and speed up both cases, drive the xattr buffer > allocation into the attribute code once we know what the actual > xattr length is. For the no-xattr case, we avoid the allocation > completely, speeding up that case. For the common ACL case, we'll > end up with a fast heap allocation (because it'll be smaller than a > page), and only for the rarer "we have a remote xattr" will we have > a multi-page allocation occur. Hence the common ACL case will be > much faster, too. > > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx> Looks good, Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
