linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC PATCH] fs: ext4: don't trap kswapd and allocating tasks on ext4 inode IO

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]

Message-ID: <20170612215150.GA17505@cmpxchg.org>
Date:   Mon, 12 Jun 2017 17:51:50 -0400
From:   Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] fs: ext4: don't trap kswapd and allocating tasks on
 ext4 inode IO

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 05:19:34PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Mon 12-06-17 10:37:27, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > However, with or without a reproducer, it seems to make sense to not
> > serialize evict() on commits when we don't have to from a correctness
> > point of view. Would you be opposed to just merging the patch anyway?
> 
> No, I guess the patch makes sense even without a reproducer. I'll send it
> to Ted for inclusion.

Thank you, I appreciate it!