linux-ext4 - Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF TOPIC] online repair of filesystems: what next?

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: <CAOQ4uxgUOuR80jsAE2DkZhMPVNT_WwnsSX8-GSkZO4=k3VbCsw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Apr 2023 10:46:32 +0300
From:   Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
To:     "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
Cc:     lsf-pc@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        xfs <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF TOPIC] online repair of filesystems: what next?

On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 7:46 AM Darrick J. Wong <djwong@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 03:18:05PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 10:49 PM Darrick J. Wong <djwong@...nel.org> wrote:
...
> > Darrick,
> >
> > Quick question.
> > You indicated that you would like to discuss the topics:
> > Atomic file contents exchange
> > Atomic directio writes
>
> This one ^^^^^^^^ topic should still get its own session, ideally with
> Martin Petersen and John Garry running it.  A few cloud vendors'
> software defined storage stacks can support multi-lba atomic writes, and
> some database software could take advantage of that to reduce nested WAL
> overhead.
>

CC Martin.
If you want to lead this session, please schedule it.

> > Are those intended to be in a separate session from online fsck?
> > Both in the same session?
> >
> > I know you posted patches for FIEXCHANGE_RANGE [1],
> > but they were hiding inside a huge DELUGE and people
> > were on New Years holidays, so nobody commented.
>
> After 3 years of sparse review comments, I decided to withdraw
> FIEXCHANGE_RANGE from general consideration after realizing that very
> few filesystems actually have the infrastructure to support atomic file
> contents exchange, hence there's little to be gained from undertaking
> fsdevel bikeshedding.
>
> > Perhaps you should consider posting an uptodate
> > topic suggestion to let people have an opportunity to
> > start a discussion before LSFMM.
>
> TBH, most of my fs complaints these days are managerial problems (Are we
> spending too much time on LTS?  How on earth do we prioritize projects
> with all these drive by bots??  Why can't we support large engineering
> efforts better???) than technical.

I penciled one session for "FS stable backporting (and other LTS woes)".
I made it a cross FS/IO session so we can have this session in the big room
and you are welcome to pull this discussion to any direction you want.

>
> (I /am/ willing to have a "Online fs metadata reconstruction: How does
> it work, and can I have some of what you're smoking?" BOF tho)
>

I penciled a session for this one already.
Maybe it would be interesting for the crowd to hear some about
"behind the scenes" - how hard it was and still is to pull off an
engineering project of this scale - lessons learned, things that
you might have done differently.

Cheers,
Amir.