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:	Wed, 22 Feb 2012 09:34:46 +0800
From:	Tao Ma <>
To:	Andreas Dilger <>
CC:	Ted Ts'o <>,
	ext4 development <>,
	linux-fsdevel <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 00/22] ext4: Add inline data support

On 02/22/2012 07:44 AM, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On 2012-02-20, at 12:00 AM, Tao Ma wrote:
>> Hi Ted, Andreas and list,
>>        This is the v4 attempt to add inline data support to ext4 inode.
>> For more information about the background, please refer to the thread
>> Changlog from v3 to v4:
>> 1. Add support for truncate which is really a bug.
>> 2. Some bug fixes.
>> 3. rebased to the latest kernel.
> I'm starting to look through this patch series, and a number of things are
Thanks for the review.
> missing that would make it much easier to understand and accept:
> - a good comment and possibly a diagram at the start of fs/ext4/xattr.c
>   that describes where and how the inline data is stored in the inode,
>   what the policies are for storing data inline or externally, etc.
sure, I will add it.
> - some benchmark data that shows why landing this code is desirable.
>   My comments in the above thread show that small files and directories
>   could benefit from this, but real proof now that you have made this
>   patch is whether this translates into noticeable space savings, and
>   hopefully also noticeable performance improvements in some benchmarks:
>   - I suspect that running some tests with bigalloc + 512-byte inodes
>     or similar could show significant space savings and speedups for
>     cold-cache directory traversal
>   - measuring boot time on a distro with Gnome or KDE could show real
>     speedups due to the many small files and directories used at startup
>   - running a benchmark like mongo or postmark with small files and
>     with 256- or 512-byte inodes may also show real speedups
>   - is there some workload that you are using that shows speedups that
>     could be described in general terms and show relative performance,
>     even if it is not possible to supply the actual benchmark/tests?
OK, I was just playing around with some bug fixes these days(to make it
stable in our production system) and doesn't do some performance tests
when upgrading from v2 to v3. I will try to do some tests and return the
data back in v5.

> I'll go through the patches and suggest cleanups and improvements, but
> without improved documentation and real performance tests the patch is
> very unlikely to be accepted by Ted.
>> Changelog from v2 to v3:
>> 1. Add support for evict data from inode if we can store xattr in it.
>> 2. Add support for fiemap
>> 3. Some nasty bug fixes
>> The v3 can be found here:
>> The v2 can be found here:
>> The v1 can be found here:
>> any suggestions are welcomed.
>> Thanks
>> Tao
> Cheers, Andreas
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
> the body of a message to
> More majordomo info at

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