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  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:	Fri, 8 Apr 2011 11:50:13 -0700
From:	Joel Becker <>
To:	Sunil Mushran <>
Cc:, Theodore Ts'o <>,
	Andreas Dilger <>,
	linux-ext4 <>,
	linux-kernel <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ext4: Calculate and verify inode checksums

On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 10:10:52AM -0700, Sunil Mushran wrote:
> On 04/07/2011 09:40 AM, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> >That said, I haven't really quantified the performance impact of this naive
> >approach yet, so I wonder -- did you see a similar scenario with ocfs2, and
> >what kind of performance increase did you get by adapting the code to use the
> >jbd2 trigger?  If there's potentially a large increase, it would be interesting
> >to apply the same conversion to the group descriptor checksumming code too.
> Joel Becker may remember the overhead. He wrote the patch. That said we have few
> differences. ocfs2 has larger (blocksized) inodes. Also, it computes ECC. The code
> is in fs/ocfs2/blockcheck.c.

	ocfs2 does the journal access/journal dirty cycle a lot more
than extN.  I think you'd want to generate your own numbers.



"Conservative, n.  A statesman who is enamoured of existing evils,
 as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them
 with others."
	- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
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