SMP skas requirements
Quoted 2 lines · Blaisorblade
Since you've now split out delete-hostfs, why don't you merge the new hostfs, possibly labeling it as "EXPERIMENTAL"?
My two main gripes right now are
there are three filesystems (or one framework and two
filesystems) in one directory
it depends on filehandle, which has aspects that neither of us likes
Quoted 3 lines
Btw, there's a ton of other patches which I don't see reasons for not merging like Al Viro's cleanups (I've given a look to them and they seem safe).
Just sent in today.
Quoted 1 line
And is
punctuaction_fixeslikely to cause instability?
No, but I recall that you didn't really like it.
Quoted 2 lines
Finally, I'd like to get devshm merged if there aren't problems with the code.
That one needs to check if /dev/shm is present, and fall back to /tmp if not.
Quoted 3 lines
Don't know how do you implemented it this time, but since we had special read/write functions for filehandles, the
get_fh()andput_fh()could be simply put in their body. Has this changed?
No, but you didn't like those (and I agree) because of the extra layering they added.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 6 lines
In this case,
get_fhshould just increment a count,put_fhshould decrement it, and the only list operation should be to move it to the end of the list so it's last to be reclaimed. The reclaimer would not reclaim filehandles with non-zero counts. I see no point in removing it from the list and adding it back, as that seems not to protect against anything.
Quoted 7 lines
You need a spinlock on the list. With the non-reference-counted approach, removing that from the list allowed dropping the spinlock over the I/O call on the host. That's not needed with the refcount.
With the refcount, likely you don't need to move it off-list, but that could maybe be useful to avoid looping on unused fd; however, this requires taking the spinlock when reinserting the element on the list.
I think you're agreeing with me, but I'm missing why we want to move things on and off the list.
Quoted 3 lines
Instead, with the refcount, if you decrease to 0 the refcount of
FH_1while a reclaim loop is iterating overFH_1, you only risk thatFH_1is missed on that reclaim pass, which isn't a race.
Yup.
Quoted 16 lines
Note: testing that a fd has refcount 0 must be done atomically with freeing it; i.e. even with an
atomic_trefcount, it must be incremented only while you have a lock on the list; and while freeing it, you must useatomic_dec_and_lock()so you get a lock on the list if the refcount goes to 0 (atomic_dec_and_lock()is equivalent to taking the lock, doing dec and test, and releasing it, but is faster).get_fh() { spin_lock(&list_lock); <iterate on list> atomic_inc(fd->count); //while still holding the lock!! if (atomic_read(fd->count) <= 0) BUG(); spin_unlock(&list_lock); }
Quoted 6 lines
put_fh(pointer to fd on list "fd"){if(atomic_dec_and_lock(fd->count, &list_lock)) { //Here we have the lock! //Remove the thing from list and free it } }
Yes, this looks reasonable.
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines
You're envisioning the os_* interfaces calling back into
filehandle.cto get a descriptor if needed?To cause fd reclaim, that's what I mean (not sure if you meant the same).
Yes.
Quoted 3 lines
I suggested last time to rename this as "
make_reclaimable" (orset_reclaimable),is_reclaimable()sounds as an interrogation method.
Fine by me.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
Quoting Jeff Dike <[email protected]>:
Quoted 6 lines · Blaisorblade
Quoted 2 lines
Finally, I'd like to get devshm merged if there aren't problems with the code.
That one needs to check if
/dev/shmis present, and fall back to /tmp if not.
Are you proposing that virtual servers automatically using /dev/shm if available and only falling back to the $TMP variable and /tmp directory if not? Or would this keep the use of $TMP if present and fall back to /dev/shm followed by /tmp?
I'm asking because I've optimized multiple host machines to offer a ramfs for virtual servers. This gives me locked memory (which still provides a significant performance improvement over time) for each instance. I would prefer to avoid using tmpfs if possible.
Alternatively, some means for preventing the host from swapping out instances would be appreciated.
Tony
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
Quoted 5 lines · Anthony Brock
Quoting Jeff Dike <[email protected]>:
Quoted 3 lines · Blaisorblade
Quoted 2 lines
Finally, I'd like to get devshm merged if there aren't problems with the code.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
That one needs to check if
/dev/shmis present, and fall back to /tmp if not.Are you proposing that virtual servers automatically using
/dev/shmif available and only falling back to the $TMP variable and /tmp directory if not? Or would this keep the use of $TMP if present and fall back to/dev/shmfollowed by /tmp?
By looking at:
http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/work/current/2.6/2.6.16/patches/devshm
Quoted 7 lines
I'm asking because I've optimized multiple host machines to offer a ramfs for virtual servers. This gives me locked memory (which still provides a significant performance improvement over time) for each instance. I would prefer to avoid using tmpfs if possible.
Alternatively, some means for preventing the host from swapping out instances would be appreciated.
ramfs is the better way IMHO.
Signature · 20 lines
Inform me of my mistakes, so I can keep imitating Homer Simpson's "Doh!". Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade (Skype ID "PaoloGiarrusso", ICQ 215621894) http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade ___________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger with Voice: chiama da PC a telefono a tariffe esclusive http://it.messenger.yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
Quoted 5 lines · Blaisorblade
Quoted 4 lines · Anthony Brock
Quoting Jeff Dike <[email protected]>:
Quoted 3 lines · Blaisorblade
Quoted 2 lines
Finally, I'd like to get devshm merged if there aren't problems with the code.
(Jeff wrote):
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
That one needs to check if
/dev/shmis present, and fall back to /tmp if not.
I'd add that it needs to retry even if the PROT_EXEC test fails:
*) if TMP, TEMP or TMPDIR are set, use that and fail if the check fails, abort, because the user wanted to use that but forgot to change permissions.
*) if instead we pick /dev/shm but it has not PROT_EXEC, we should switch to /tmp and fail only then.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Are you proposing that virtual servers automatically using
/dev/shmif available and only falling back to the $TMP variable and /tmp directory if not? Or would this keep the use of $TMP if present and fall back to/dev/shmfollowed by /tmp?By looking at:
http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/work/current/2.6/2.6.16/patches/devs
hm
Sorry, forgot to finish. That patch keeps checking TMP,TMPDIR and TEMP (don't remember the order), but if none is set, it switches the default from /tmp to /dev/shm.
Signature · 23 lines
Inform me of my mistakes, so I can keep imitating Homer Simpson's "Doh!". Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade (Skype ID "PaoloGiarrusso", ICQ 215621894) http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade ___________________________________ Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB http://mail.yahoo.it ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
Quoted 6 lines · Blaisorblade
Sorry, forgot to finish. That patch keeps checking TMP,TMPDIR and TEMP (don't
remember the order), but if none is set, it switches the default from /tmp
to/dev/shm.
This makes sense. It does appear that the patch first checks the environmental variable before using the defaults. While I would like to take advantage of the neat feature Jeff is working on (hot plug memory), I have a greater need for consistent and reliable speed.
Thanks!
Tony
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel