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: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 16:17:01 +0800 From: Tao Ma <tm@....ma> To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com> CC: Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>, Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca> Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 00/17] ext4: Add inline data support. On 10/26/2011 04:05 PM, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Tao Ma <tm@....ma <mailto:tm@....ma>> > wrote: > > Hi Ted, Andreas and list, > This is my 1st attempt to add inline data support to ext4 > inode. For > more information about the background, please refer to the thread > http://marc.info/?l=linux-ext4&m=131715205428067&w=2 > <http://marc.info/?l=linux-ext4&m=131715205428067&w=2> > When I sent out the RFC on Sep.27, Andreas suggested that we can use the > space of xattr to put inline data. So this is the 1st version using that > method. It should be easy to change if we decide to use other places in > inode(e.g the unused extent space) since all the inline data > manipulation function is wrapped with function like ext4_*_inline_data. > > Currently I use all the space between i_extra_isize and inode_size if > inode_size = 256. For inode_size > 256, half of that space is used so as > to leave some space for other xattrs. > > This is only a V1 and there are still something to do(e.g. I am thinking > of using unused extent space), but I'd like to send it out earlier so > that it can be reviewed ASAP. > > Some simple tests shows that with a linux-3.0 vanilla source, the new > dir can save 1% disk space. For my "/usr", it can save about 3.2% > spaces. I guess for volume with future bigalloc support, it should save > more space for us for small dir. I also run some other tests and it > seems the code is OK for a try. I haven't found a good test cases that > can test the small file/dir(tens of bytes in my case) performance where > inline data should have some good number. > > Any comments are welcomed. > > git diff --stat > > fs/ext4/dir.c | 117 ++++++++++- > fs/ext4/ext4.h | 15 +- > fs/ext4/ialloc.c | 4 + > fs/ext4/inode.c | 583 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > > > Hi Tao, > > One generic comment. > how about adding a new file fs/ext4/inline.c to host inline data support > related code? > inode.c is too big as it is and there is an effort the size it down. sure, I will try to separate related functions to inline.c in my V2. Thanks Tao -- 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