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]

Message-Id: <1159811516.8907.38.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Mon, 02 Oct 2006 18:51:56 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>
Cc:	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...el.com>,
	"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

Ar Llu, 2006-10-02 am 13:11 -0400, ysgrifennodd Trond Myklebust:
> Ext3 does not use flock() in order to lock its journal. The performance
> issues that he is seeing may well be due to the journalling, but that
> has nothing to do with flock_lock_file_wait.

The ext3 journal also generally speaking improves many-writer
performance as do the reservations so the claim seems odd on that basis
too. Rerun the test on a gigabyte iRam or similar and you'll see where
the non-media bottlenecks actually are

-
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/