| 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: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 02:08:57 -0700 From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@...nq.net> To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com> Cc: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> Subject: Re: Distributed storage. On Monday 13 August 2007 00:45, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Mon, Aug 13 2007, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > You did not comment on the one about putting the bio destructor > > > in the ->endio handler, which looks dead simple. The majority of > > > cases just use the default endio handler and the default > > > destructor. Of the remaining cases, where a specialized > > > destructor is needed, typically a specialized endio handler is > > > too, so combining is free. There are few if any cases where a > > > new specialized endio handler would need to be written. > > > > We could do that without too much work, I agree. > > But that idea fails as well, since reference counts and IO completion > are two completely seperate entities. So unless end IO just happens > to be the last user holding a reference to the bio, you cannot free > it. That is not a problem. When bio_put hits zero it calls ->endio instead of the destructor. The ->endio sees that the count is zero and destroys the bio. Regards, Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" 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