linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC] enable ext4 allocate blocks across group boundary

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <B931D1EA-1D19-4054-9427-F1212D2837A7@dilger.ca>
Date:	Wed, 14 Mar 2012 20:34:10 -0600
From:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>
To:	Yongqiang Yang <xiaoqiangnk@...il.com>
Cc:	Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] enable ext4 allocate blocks across group boundary

On 2012-03-14, at 6:52 PM, Yongqiang Yang wrote:
> Here is a proposal to enable ext4 allocate blocks across group boundary.
> 
> Now ext4 allocates blocks within a single block group by locking a
> group.   Flex_bg puts metadata blocks together, as a result,it
> enlarges contiguous blocks.  So we can enable ext4 allocate blocks
> within a flex block group. Inode allocation takes group lock as block
> allocation,  I am not sure if we should allocate inode within single
> group as before.
> 
> If we do this, then the new group boundary will be flex block group
> boundary.  I am not sure if it is worth doing.

The maximum extent size is the same as a single block group, so there
is relatively little value in doing this, IMHO.

Cheers, Andreas





--
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