linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC] basic delayed allocation in VFS

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]

Message-ID: <46ACEFAB.1010709@clusterfs.com>
Date:	Sun, 29 Jul 2007 23:51:07 +0400
From:	Alex Tomas <alex@...sterfs.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
CC:	ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] basic delayed allocation in VFS

I'm a bit worried about one thing ... it looks like XFS and ext4
use different techniques to order data and metadata referencing
them. now I'm not that optimistic that we can separate ordering
from delalloc itself clean and reasonable way. In general, I'd
prefer common code in fs/ (mm/?) of course, for number of reasons.

thanks, Alex


Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> I'm a big proponent of having proper common delalloc code, but the
> one proposed here is not generic for the existing filesystem using
> delalloc.  It's still on my todo list to revamp the xfs code to get
> rid of some of the existing mess and make it useable genericly.  If
> the ext4 users are fine with the end result we could move to generic
> code.
> 
> Note that moving to VFS is bullshit either way, writeback code is
> nowhere near the VFS nor should it.


-
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