linux-kernel - Re: Btrfs v0.16 released

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: <20080816192749.GA8774@mit.edu>
Date:	Sat, 16 Aug 2008 15:27:50 -0400
From:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
To:	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Btrfs v0.16 released

On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 02:10:10PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> 
> I tried just the writeback_index patch and got only 4 fragmented files
> on ext4 after a compilebench run.  Then I tried again and got 1200.
> Seems there is something timing dependent in here ;)
> 

Yeah, the patch Aneesh sent to change where we added the inode to the
dirty list was false lead.  The right fix is in the ext4 patch queue
now.  I think we have the problem licked and a quick test showed it
increased the compilebench MB/s by a very tiny amount (enough so that
I wasnt sure whether or not it was measurement error), but it does
avoid the needly fragmentation.

						- Ted
--
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/