linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC] [PATCH 1/1] nanosecond timestamps

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:	Mon, 5 Feb 2007 23:09:16 -0500
From:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
To:	Kalpak Shah <kalpak@...sterfs.com>
Cc:	linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andreas Dilger <adilger@...sterfs.com>, sct@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 1/1] nanosecond timestamps

On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 08:09:40PM +0530, Kalpak Shah wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> This patch is a spinoff of the old nanosecond patches. It includes some
> cleanups and addition of a creation timestamp. The
> EXT3_FEATURE_RO_COMPAT_EXTRA_ISIZE flag has also been added along with
> s_{min, want}_extra_isize fields in struct ext3_super_block. 

Thanks for sending it.  I haven't had a chance to go over it in detail
yet, but one quick comment; the patch looks like it got line-wrapped
by your mail agent (looks like you're using Evolution 2.0).  Could you
send it as a text/plain attachment, or otherwise fix your mailer to
not wrap your patches?  

It might be nice if the patch had a way of adjusting the granularity
by masking off bits of the nanoseconds field, so we can benchmark how
much overhead constantly updating the ctime field is going to cost us.  

Regards,

						- Ted
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html