linux-kernel - Re: Postal 56% waits for flock_lock_file

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:	Mon, 2 Oct 2006 09:57:01 -0700
From:	"Tim Chen" <tim.c.chen@...el.com>
To:	"Trond Myklebust" <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>
Cc:	"Ananiev, Leonid I" <leonid.i.ananiev@...el.com>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <Linux-Kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Postal 56% waits for flock_lock_file_wait

On 10/1/06, Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no> wrote:

>
> I still don't get it. The job of the flock() system call is to sleep if
> someone already holds the lock, and then grab the lock when it is
> released. If that is not what the user expects, then the user has the
> option of not calling flock(). This has nothing to do with open().
>
> Trond
>

If I understand Leonid correctly, I think what he is saying is ext3
does not scale very well when you have a large number of processes
acessing file system because of locks in journal.    This is seen in
the excessive idle time.  By comparison, ext2 does not have this
issue.

Tim
-
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/