linux-kernel - Re: XArray documentation

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 24 Nov 2017 11:56:15 -0800
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
Cc:     Martin Steigerwald <martin@...htvoll.de>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>
Subject: Re: XArray documentation

On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 11:48:49AM -0800, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> Adding on to Martin's questions. Basically what is the motivation
> behind it? It seems like a replacement for radix tree, so, it would be
> good to write why radix tree was not good enough or which use cases
> radix tree could not solve. Also how XArray solves those
> issues/use-cases? And if you know which scenarios or use-cases where
> XArray will not be an optimal solution.

I strongly disagree that there should be any mention of the radix tree
in this document.  In the Glorious Future, there will be no more radix
tree and so talking about it will only confuse people (because Linux's
radix tree is not in fact a radix tree).

Talking about why the radix tree isn't good enough is for the cover letter.
I did it quite well here:

https://lwn.net/Articles/715948/