linux-ext4 - Re: delayed extent tree test cases

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:	Thu, 08 Mar 2012 23:39:21 -0700
From:	Allison Henderson <achender@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Yongqiang Yang <xiaoqiangnk@...il.com>
CC:	Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>,
	"Ted Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Mingming Cao <cmm@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: delayed extent tree test cases

On 03/08/2012 10:36 PM, Yongqiang Yang wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Allison Henderson
> <achender@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>  wrote:
>> Hi Yongqiang,
> Hi Allison,
>
>
>>
>> I am looking for test cases to exercise your delayed extent tree patch set.
>> I am working on expanding your solution for extent locks, and it would be
>> nice to have some sanity checks as I go along to make sure I have not broken
>> it :)  Are there any tests in particular that you used while you were
>> developing it?  Thx!
>
>       There is no particular tests for delayed extents tree on my hand.
>   I just tested the patch set with xfstests.   If there is any help I
> can provide, please tell me.
>
> Yongqiang.
>
>>
>> Allison Henderson
>>
>
>
>

Alrighty, I'll give it a run through xfstests tonight, and then maybe I 
can show you what I've got so far.  My first few patches are pretty much 
just renaming things from delayed_extent to status_extent, sense it's 
doing a lot more than delayed extents now.  I figured those patches we 
could just merge together sense I dont think your set has been merged yet.

The next step that I am working on now is getting it to track allocated 
extents.  So any pointers for doing that would be helpful :)  It looks 
like the current code is optimized for merging extents as much as 
possible, and that makes sense for delayed extents, but for allocated 
extents, we need to get it to mirror the existing extents.  That way we 
will know what extents there are to lock before we start doing things 
with the current extent tree.

When I think about all the ins and outs of trying to keep the trees in 
sync, I realize it may get complex, but I dont think we would want to 
deal with the odd things that might come out of allowing tasks to lock a 
partial extent either.  Suggestions for simplifications are certainly 
welcome though :)

Thx!
Allison Henderson

--
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