linux-kernel - Re: [00/41] Large Blocksize Support V7 (adds memmap support)

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: <20070916182136.GC2393@lazybastard.org>
Date:	Sun, 16 Sep 2007 20:21:37 +0200
From:	Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...e.de>,
	Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@...ormatik.uni-tuebingen.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Mel Gorman <mel@...net.ie>,
	William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>,
	David Chinner <dgc@....com>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@...il.com>,
	Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...il.com>,
	Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...il.com>,
	swin wang <wangswin@...il.com>, totty.lu@...il.com,
	hugh@...itas.com
Subject: Re: [00/41] Large Blocksize Support V7 (adds memmap support)

On Sun, 16 September 2007 11:15:36 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Sep 2007, Jörn Engel wrote:
> > 
> > I have been toying with the idea of having seperate caches for pinned
> > and movable dentries.  Downside of such a patch would be the number of
> > memcpy() operations when moving dentries from one cache to the other.
> 
> Totally inappropriate.
> 
> I bet 99% of all "dentry_lookup()" calls involve turning the last dentry 
> from having a count of zero ("movable") to having a count of 1 ("pinned").
> 
> So such an approach would fundamentally be broken. It would slow down all 
> normal dentry lookups, since the *common* case for leaf dentries is that 
> they have a zero count.

Why am I not surprised? :)

> So it's much better to do it on a "directory/file" basis, on the 
> assumption that files are *mostly* movable (or just freeable). The fact 
> that they aren't always (ie while kept open etc), is likely statistically 
> not all that important.

My approach is to have one for mount points and ramfs/tmpfs/sysfs/etc.
which are pinned for their entire lifetime and another for regular
files/inodes.  One could take a three-way approach and have
always-pinned, often-pinned and rarely-pinned.

We won't get never-pinned that way.

Jörn

-- 
The wise man seeks everything in himself; the ignorant man tries to get
everything from somebody else.
-- unknown
-
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/