linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH -v2 1/3] jbd2: Use atomic variables to avoid taking t_handle_lock in jbd2_journal

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]

Date:	Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:30:46 -0400
From:	Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:	Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com, John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
	Keith Maanthey <kmannth@...ibm.com>,
	Eric Whitney <eric.whitney@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 1/3] jbd2: Use atomic variables to avoid taking
 t_handle_lock in jbd2_journal_stop

On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 09:45:55PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
>   Ah, OK. You're right. I just thought we eventually want to remove the
> lock but you're right that currently the code is fine. Sorry for the noise.

I would love to get rid of the j_state_lock, but looking through the
code, I couldn't figure out how to do this safely.  Hence my
conversion of the j_state_lock to a rwlock_t, with the downside of
this causing more cache line bounces.  If someone can suggest a way to
drop needing a global spinlock (whether it is an exclusive or rwlock)
in start_this_handle(), I'd love to hear them.

   			    	    	 - 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