linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 5/5] ext4: Use buckets for cr 1 block scan instead of rbtree

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: <20220908090323.e4enzh5ahxxw64ic@quack3>
Date:   Thu, 8 Sep 2022 11:03:23 +0200
From:   Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:     Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Ted Tso <tytso@....edu>,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@...mhuis.info>,
        Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@...e.com>,
        Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] ext4: Use buckets for cr 1 block scan instead of
 rbtree

On Thu 08-09-22 13:59:58, Ojaswin Mujoo wrote:
> Hi Jan,
> 
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 05:29:11PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> >  
> >  ** snip **
> >  /*
> >   * Choose next group by traversing average fragment size tree. Updates *new_cr
> Maybe we can change this to "average fragment size list of suitable
> order"

Right. Fixed. Thanks for catching this.

> > - * if cr lvel needs an update. Sets EXT4_MB_SEARCH_NEXT_LINEAR to indicate that
> > - * the linear search should continue for one iteration since there's lock
> > - * contention on the rb tree lock.
> > + * if cr level needs an update. 
> >   */
> >  static void ext4_mb_choose_next_group_cr1(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac,
> >  		int *new_cr, ext4_group_t *group, ext4_group_t ngroups)
> >  {
> >  	struct ext4_sb_info *sbi = EXT4_SB(ac->ac_sb);
> > -	int avg_fragment_size, best_so_far;
> > -	struct rb_node *node, *found;
> > -	struct ext4_group_info *grp;
> 
> Other than that, this patch along with the updated mb_structs_summary
> proc file change looks good to me.

Thanks for review & testing!

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
SUSE Labs, CR