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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 27 Jun 2008 17:30:41 -0700
From:	Mingming Cao <cmm@...ibm.com>
To:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>
Cc:	Frédéric Bohé <frederic.bohe@...l.net>,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix online resize with mballoc


On Thu, 2008-06-26 at 17:26 -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Jun 26, 2008  16:58 +0200, Fr�d�ric Boh� wrote:
> > From: Frederic Bohe <frederic.bohe@...l.net>

> 
> >  static int ext4_mb_init_backend(struct super_block *sb)
> >  {
> > +	/* This is the total number of blocks used by GDT including
> > +	* the number of reserved blocks for GDT.
> > +	* The s_group_info array is allocated with this value
> > +	* to allow a clean online resize without a complex
> > +	* manipulation of pointer.
> > +	* The drawback is the unused memory when no resize
> > +	* occurs but it's very low in terms of pages
> > +	* (see comments below)
> > +	*/
> 
> Also align comment '*' in the same columns.
> 
> > +	num_meta_group_infos_max = num_meta_group_infos +
> > +				le16_to_cpu(es->s_reserved_gdt_blocks);
> 
> The only drawback of NOT handling this properly is that once (eventually)
> we allow resizing with META_BG this code will be broken again.  It at
> least deserves a comment like "Need to handle this properly when META_BG
> resizing is allowed" so that it will show up on any grep for META_BG.
> 

It probably useful to document this limit in the change log too.

It would be nice to do it right now since we are here, if it's not too
complicated. The locking cost to do dynamic re-allocation of
s_groups_info seems low to me if we use read-write lock, as the write
path is relatively rare. But I guess there are a lot of there places we
need to worry to enable resize to any large with FLEX_BG/META_BG, and
could deal with that later.

Mingming
> It probably also makes sense to round this up to the next power-of-two
> value, since kmalloc will do that internally anyways, and it gives us
> some resizing headroom for no cost.
> 
> > @@ -2276,62 +2431,15 @@ static int ext4_mb_init_backend(struct s
> >  		sbi->s_group_info[i] = meta_group_info;
> >  	}
> >  
> >  	for (i = 0; i < sbi->s_groups_count; i++) {
> > +		if (ext4_mb_add_groupinfo(sb, i, desc) != 0)
> > +			goto err_freebuddy;
> 
> This is much nicer, great.
> 
> Cheers, Andreas
> --
> Andreas Dilger
> Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
> Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.
> 
> --
> 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

--
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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists