linux-kernel - Networked filesystems vs backing_dev

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1193477666.5648.61.camel@lappy>
Date:	Sat, 27 Oct 2007 11:34:26 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, sfrench@...ba.org,
	jaharkes@...cmu.edu, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	vandrove@...cvut.cz
Subject: Networked filesystems vs backing_dev_info

Hi,

I had me a little look at bdi usage in networked filesystems.

 NFS, CIFS, (smbfs), AFS, CODA and NCP

And of those, NFS is the only one that I could find that creates
backing_dev_info structures. The rest seems to fall back to
default_backing_dev_info.

With my recent per bdi dirty limit patches the bdi has become more
important than it has been in the past. While falling back to the
default_backing_dev_info isn't wrong per-se, it isn't right either. 

Could I implore the various maintainers to look into this issue for
their respective filesystem. I'll try and come up with some patches to
address this, but feel free to beat me to it.

peterz

-
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/