linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC] Block reservation for ext3 (continued)

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]

Message-ID: <loom.20101019T174204-233@post.gmane.org>
Date:	Tue, 19 Oct 2010 15:58:04 +0000 (UTC)
From:	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com>
To:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Block reservation for ext3 (continued)

Jan Kara <jack <at> suse.cz> writes:
> Now I'd like to get to some agreement what we should do. Bite the bullet
> and use (a), or should I continue improving (c)? Or is (b) considered a
> better alternative (we would only need to track reserved data blocks and
> use page dirty tag to detect whether indirect block has some (possibly)
> delayed write pending and thus should be preserved even though there are
> no blocks allocated under it during truncate)? Or something totally
> different?
> 
> 								Honza

Hello,

I'm saying with my *very* limited knowledge. Please don't hurt me so hard
even if it's totally crappy. ;-)

How about having a dedicated thread or something for the allocation? When
page fault occurs we can wake it up with sufficient information and let
it start to do the work on behalf of the user. Doesn't it make any sense?

Thanks.

-- 
Regards,
Namhyung Kim


--
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