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:	Thu, 18 Aug 2011 11:54:17 -0700
From:	Jiaying Zhang <>
To:	Michael Tokarev <>
Cc:	"Ted Ts'o" <>, Tao Ma <>,
	Jan Kara <>,,
Subject: Re: DIO process stuck apparently due to dioread_nolock (3.0)

On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 11:49 PM, Michael Tokarev <> wrote:
> 17.08.2011 21:02, Ted Ts'o wrote:
> []
>> What I'd like to do long-term here is to change things so that (a)
>> instead of instantiating the extent as uninitialized, writing the
>> data, and then doing the uninit->init conversion to writing the data
>> and then instantiated the extent as initialzied.  This would also
>> allow us to get rid of data=ordered mode.  And we should make it work
>> for fs block size != page size.
>> It means that we need a way of adding this sort of information into an
>> in-memory extent cache but which isn't saved to disk until the data is
>> written.  We've also talked about adding the information about whether
>> an extent is subject to delalloc as well, so we don't have to grovel
>> through the page cache and look at individual buffers attached to the
>> pages.  And there are folks who have been experimenting with an
>> in-memory extent tree cache to speed access to fast PCIe-attached
>> flash.
>> It seems to me that if we're careful a single solution should be able
>> to solve all of these problems...
> What about current situation, how do you think - should it be ignored
> for now, having in mind that dioread_nolock isn't used often (but it
> gives _serious_ difference in read speed), or, short term, fix this
> very case which have real-life impact already, while implementing a
> long-term solution?
I plan to send my patch as a bandaid fix. It doesn't solve the fundamental
problem but I think it helps close the race you saw on your test. In the long
term, I agree that we should think about implementing an extent tree cache
and use it to hold pending uninitialized-to-initialized extent conversions.


> Thank you!
> /mjt
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