| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:59:37 -0600 From: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca> To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>, linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>, xfs <xfs@....sgi.com>, jack <jack@...e.cz>, axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, dchinner <dchinner@...hat.com> Subject: Re: buffered writeback torture program On 2011-04-21, at 11:41 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 01:34:44PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: >> Sorry, this doesn't do it. I think that given what a strange special >> case this is, we're best off waiting for the IO-less throttling, and >> maybe changing the code in xfs/ext4 to be a little more seek aware. Or >> maybe not, it has to get written eventually either way. > > I'm not sure what you mean with seek aware. XFS only clusters > additional pages that are in the same extent, and in fact only does > so for asynchrononous writeback. Not sure how this should be more > seek aware. But doesn't XFS have potentially very large extents, especially in the case of files that were fallocate()'d or linearly written? If there is a single 8GB extent, and then random writes within that extent (seems very database like) grouping the all of the writes in the extent doesn't seem so great. Cheers, Andreas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists