linux-kernel - Re: Reiser4 Inclusion

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20060717223423.24205.qmail@science.horizon.com>
Date:	17 Jul 2006 18:34:23 -0400
From:	linux@...izon.com
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
Subject: Re: Reiser4 Inclusion

>> I have deployed two nearly identical servers in Florida (I live in
>> Washington state) but one difference: one uses ext3 and the other
>> reiser4. The ping time of the reiser4 server is (on average) 20ms faster
>> than the ext3 server.
>
> OK, I'll bite.  What *POSSIBLE* reason is there for the choice of filesystem
> to matter to an ICMP Echo Request/Reply?  I'm suspecting something else,
> like the ext3 server needs to re-ARP before sending the Echo Reply, or some
> such.

Er... I was assuming that was an application-level ping, e.g. "fetch
database-generated web page", and not an ICMP-level ping.

If this *is* talking about ICMP-level ping, I agree completely;
that makes no sense.  Either there is a dire bug in Linux networking,
or the networks aren't the same.  Assuming the two machines are
located together (if they're not, there's your problem right there),
is the same 20 ms visible when you ping them from each other?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/