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: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0709181803020.16478@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:06:52 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Nathan Scott <nscott@...nex.com>
cc:	Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...e.de>,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
	Mel Gorman <mel@...net.ie>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
	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, joern@...ybastard.org
Subject: Re: [00/41] Large Blocksize Support V7 (adds memmap support)



On Wed, 19 Sep 2007, Nathan Scott wrote:
> 
> FWIW (and I hate to let reality get in the way of a good conspiracy) -
> all SGI systems have always defaulted to using 4K blocksize filesystems;

Yes. And I've been told that:

> there's very few customers who would use larger

.. who apparently would like to  move to x86-64. That was what people 
implied at the kernel summit.

>						 especially as the Linux
> kernel limitations in this area are well known.  There's no "16K mess"
> that SGI is trying to clean up here (and SGI have offered both IA64 and
> x86_64 systems for some time now, so not sure how you came up with that
> whacko theory).

Well, if that is the case, then I vote that we drop the whole patch-series 
entirely. It clearly has no reason for existing at all.

There is *no* valid reason for 16kB blocksizes unless you have legacy 
issues. The performance issues have nothing to do with the block-size, and 
should be solvable by just making sure that your stupid "state of the art" 
crap SCSI controller gets contiguous physical memory, which is best done 
in the read-ahead code.

So get your stories straight, people.

			Linus
-
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/