linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 0/5 v3] ext4: Fix performance regression with mballoc

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:   Fri, 9 Sep 2022 12:40:14 +0200
From:   Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:     Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@...e.com>
Cc:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@...mhuis.info>,
        Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Harshad Shirwadkar <harshadshirwadkar@...il.com>,
        Ted Tso <tytso@....edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5 v3] ext4: Fix performance regression with mballoc

On Thu 08-09-22 12:36:10, Stefan Wahren wrote:
> Hi Jan,
> 
> Am 08.09.22 um 11:21 schrieb Jan Kara:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Here is the third version of my mballoc improvements to avoid spreading
> > allocations with mb_optimize_scan=1. Since v2 there are only small changes and
> > fixes found during review and testing. Overall the series looks mostly ready to
> > go, I just didn't see any comments regarding patch 3 - a fix of metabg handling
> > in the Orlov allocator which is kind of independent, I've just found it when
> > reading the code. Also patch 5 needs final review after all the fixes.
> > 
> > Changes since v1:
> > - reworked data structure for CR 1 scan
> > - make small closed files use locality group preallocation
> > - fix metabg handling in the Orlov allocator
> > 
> > Changes since v2:
> > - whitespace fixes
> > - fix outdated comment
> > - fix handling of mb_structs_summary procfs file
> > - fix bad unlock on error recovery path
> 
> unfortunately the real patches doesn't have v3 which leads to confusion.

Yeah, OK, I've updated my scripting for posting patches to include version
in each posted patch :)

> Just a note: in case this series cannot be applied for stable (5.15), we
> need a second solution to fix the regression there.

My plan is to backport the current series. It is not that invasive so it
should be doable...

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