| 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, 11 Jul 2012 16:36:16 +0300
From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
Linux FS Maling List <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Maling List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ext4 Mailing List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv6 3/5] ext4: remove unnecessary superblock dirtying
On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 12:11 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > So case 2.b is a bit controversial, but I think it is acceptable. After all, by
> > > enabling checksumming we already sign up for paying the price of calculating
> > > it. The way to improve checksumming performance globally would be to calculate
> > > it just before sending buffers to the I/O queue. We'd need some kind of
> > > call-back which could be registered by file-systems.
> Actually, the most common case of adding orphan inode used
> ext4_handle_dirty_super_now() so for that case there is no difference. And
> other cases are so rare it really does not matter... So there shouldn't be
> any measurable difference.
Actually, the entire "orphan" case uses 'ext4_handle_dirty_super_now()',
so this code-path is actually unaffected by my patch-set, so I do not
have to even worry about it. My changes affect only the
'ext4_handle_dirty_super()' users, and there are only 3 of them, and
they are extremely rare one-time events.
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists