linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] Fix fsync livelock

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]

Date:	Mon, 6 Oct 2008 06:50:24 -0700
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, agk@...hat.com, mbroz@...hat.com,
	chris@...chsys.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Fix fsync livelock

On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 09:00:14 -0400 (EDT)
Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 5 Oct 2008, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 5 Oct 2008 23:30:51 -0400 (EDT
> > > The point is that many fsync()s may run in parallel and you have
> > > just one inode and just one chain. And if you add two-word
> > > list_head to a page, to link it on this list, many developers
> > > will hate it for increasing its size.
> > 
> > why to a page?
> > a list head in the inode and chain up the bios....
> 
> And if you want to wait for a bio submitted by a different process? 
> There's no way you can find the bio from the page.

the point is that the kernel would always chain it to the inode,
independent of who or when it is submitted


-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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/