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, 16 Jan 2008 12:55:07 +0800 From: Fengguang Wu <wfg@...l.ustc.edu.cn> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Michael Rubin <mrubin@...gle.com>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org Subject: Re: [patch] Converting writeback linked lists to a tree based data structure On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 08:42:36PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:25:53 +0800 Fengguang Wu <wfg@...l.ustc.edu.cn> wrote: > > > list_heads are OK if we use them for one and only function. > > Not really. They're inappropriate when you wish to remember your > position in the list while you dropped the lock (as we must do in > writeback). > > A data structure which permits us to interate across the search key rather > than across the actual storage locations is more appropriate. I totally agree with you. What I mean is to first do the split of functions - into three: ordering, starvation prevention, and blockade waiting. Then to do better ordering by adopting radix tree(or rbtree if radix tree is not enough), and lastly get rid of the list_heads to avoid locking. Does it sound like a good path? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists