linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC] Parallelize IO for e2fsck

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: <20080128193005.GC4032@ucw.cz>
Date:	Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:30:05 +0000
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
	David Chinner <dgc@....com>,
	Valerie Henson <val@...consulting.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andreas Dilger <adilger@...sterfs.com>,
	Ric Wheeler <ric@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Parallelize IO for e2fsck

Hi!

> It's been discussed before, but I suspect the main reason why it was
> never done is no one submitted a patch.  Also, the problem is actually
> a pretty complex one.  There are a couple of different stages where
> you might want to send an alert to processes:
> 
>     * Data is starting to get ejected from page/buffer cache
>     * System is starting to swap
>     * System is starting to really struggle to find memory
>     * System is starting an out-of-memory killer
> 
> AIX's SIGDANGER really did the last two, where the OOM killer would
> tend to avoid processes that had a SIGDANGER handler in favor of
> processes that were SIGDANGER unaware.
> 
> Then there is the additional complexity in Linux that you have
> multiple zones of memory, which at least on the historically more
> popular x86 was highly, highly important.  You could say that whenever
> there is sufficient memory pressure in any zone that you start
> ejecting data from caches or start to swap that you start sending the
> signals --- but on x86 systems with lowmem, that could happen quite
> frequently, and since a user process has no idea whether its resources
> are in lowmem or highmem, there's not much you can do about this.

As user pages are always in highmem, this should be easy to decide:
only send SIGDANGER when highmem is full. (Yes, there are
inodes/dentries/file descriptors in lowmem, but I doubt apps will
respond to SIGDANGER by closing files).
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
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