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]

Message-ID: <20081008105611.GA1396@ucw.cz>
Date:	Wed, 8 Oct 2008 12:56:11 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc:	Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>,
	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 Sun 2008-10-05 17:30:19, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Oct 2008 20:01:46 -0400 (EDT)
> Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> > I assume that if very few people complained about the livelock till
> > now, very few people will see degraded write performance. My patch
> > blocks the writes only if the livelock happens, so if the livelock
> > doesn't happen in unpatched kernel for most people, the patch won't
> > make it worse.
> 
> I object to calling this a livelock. It's not. 

8 hours of process in D state is a livelock. And we can do minimal fix
here, this almost never happens in real life anyway.

Latency imposed of writer should not be a problem...
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/