linux-kernel - Re: merging the per-bdi writeback patchset

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: <20090623014835.1fc8fb14.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 23 Jun 2009 01:48:35 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, hch@...radead.org
Subject: Re: merging the per-bdi writeback patchset

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:11:56 +0200 Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com> wrote:

> Things are looking good for this patchset and it's been in -next for
> almost a week without any reports of problems. So I'd like to merge it
> for 2.6.31 if at all possible. Any objections?

erk.  I was rather expecting I'd have time to have a look at it all.

It's unclear to me actually _why_ the performance changes which were
observed have actually occurred.  In fact it's a bit unclear (to me)
why the patchset was written and what it sets out to achieve :(

A long time ago the XFS guys (Dave Chinner iirc) said that XFS needs
more than one thread per device to keep the device saturated.  Did that
get addressed?

(kthread_run() returns an ERR_PTR() on error, btw - not NULL.)

--
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/