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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 23:31:50 +0100 From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca> Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>, Chris Mason <clm@...com>, Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>, xfs <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>, linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>, linux-cachefs@...hat.com, linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com> Subject: Re: How capacious and well-indexed are ext4, xfs and btrfs directories? Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca> wrote: > As described elsewhere in the thread, allowing concurrent create and unlink > in a directory (rename probably not needed) would be invaluable for scaling > multi-threaded workloads. Neil Brown posted a prototype patch to add this > to the VFS for NFS: Actually, one thing I'm looking at is using vfs_tmpfile() to create a new file (or a replacement file when invalidation is required) and then using vfs_link() to attach directory entries in the background (possibly using vfs_link() with AT_LINK_REPLACE[1] instead of unlink+link). Any thoughts on how that might scale? vfs_tmpfile() doesn't appear to require the directory inode lock. I presume the directory is required for security purposes in addition to being a way to specify the target filesystem. David [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/cover.1580251857.git.osandov@fb.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists