| 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: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 13:47:59 +1100 From: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk> Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Inode Lock Scalability V4 On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 04:55:15AM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 07:13:54PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > This patch set is just the basic inode_lock breakup patches plus a > > few more simple changes to the inode code. It stops short of > > introducing RCU inode freeing because those changes are not > > completely baked yet. > > It also doesn't contain per-zone locking and lrus, or scalability of > superblock list locking. Sure - that's all explained in the description of what the series actually contains later on. > And while the rcu-walk path walking is not fully baked, it has been > reviewed by Linus and is in pretty good shape. So I prefer to utilise > RCU locking here too, seeing as we know it will go in. I deliberately left out the RCU changes as we know that the version that is in your tree causes siginificant performance regressions for single threaded and some parallel workloads on small (<=8p) machines. There is more development needed there so, IMO, it has never been a candidate for this series which is aimed directly at .37 inclusion. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@...morbit.com -- 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