linux-kernel - Re: [patch 00/33] my current vfs scalability patch queue

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: <20090904070506.GA1875@wotan.suse.de>
Date:	Fri, 4 Sep 2009 09:05:06 +0200
From:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
To:	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 00/33] my current vfs scalability patch queue

On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 04:51:41PM +1000, npiggin@...e.de wrote:
> But it is now getting to the point where I will need to get some agreement with
> the approach.

BTW, yes I'm aware numbers and results are needed. I have some things,
but I don't have that big systems to test with, or really interesting
workoads.

I know google is running into lock contention which is why they proposed
the batched iput dput patches. Peter Chubb hit inode lock contention
with reaim (don't konw if that is considered realistic). And SGI have
had various lock contention problems with NFS fileservers.

So aside from reviews and suggestions, what would be most helpful to me
would be people willing to test out their problematic workloads with
me. It's the only way I can try to get them fixed.

Thanks,
Nick
--
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/