linux-ext4 - Re: ENOSPC returned during writepages

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080820215542.GD16634@mit.edu>
Date:	Wed, 20 Aug 2008 17:55:42 -0400
From:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
To:	Mingming Cao <cmm@...ibm.com>
Cc:	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
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 majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html