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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Wed, 20 Aug 2008 17:55:42 -0400
From:	Theodore Tso <>
To:	Mingming Cao <>
Cc:	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <>,
	ext4 development <>
Subject: Re: ENOSPC returned during writepages

On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 01:56:48PM -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
> > BTW, I was looking at the percpu_counter interface, and I'm confused
> > why we have percpu_counter_sum_and_set() and percpu_counter_sum().  If
> > we're taking the fbc->lock to calculate the precise value of the
> > counter, why not simply set fbc->count?  
> I added the percpu_count_sum_and _set() interface, when addingdelalloc
> block reservation. I agree it make sense to clean up current all the
> user of percpu_counter_sum() and replace with
> percpu_counter_sum_and_set(), just hasn't get chance to clean up yet.

Why not make percpu_counter_sum() always do sum_and_set, and change
the ext4 calls to use percpu_counter_sum()?  In fact, I'm wondering
why you didn't do that in the first place?  Was that your trying to be
as conservative as possible with respect to not changing things?

   		   	    	 	    - Ted
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists