linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] tmpfs: Improve tmpfs scalability

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1274458067.31973.8955.camel@mudge.jf.intel.com>
Date:	Fri, 21 May 2010 09:07:47 -0700
From:	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] tmpfs: Improve tmpfs scalability

On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 18:55 -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:

> 
> Interesting, thank you - I'll take a look, but not this week.
> 
> I do hope you're using Aim7 just as an example: you know that mounting
> tmpfs with nr_blocks=0,nr_inodes=0 skips those shmem_sb_info updates
> altogether?  Mounting in such a way should be fine for getting better
> numbers out of Aim7; but yes, there are reallife uses for tmpfs which
> are safer with the nr_blocks,nr_inodes limits.
> 

Yes, Aim7 was provided as an example to illustrate the locking
bottleneck when blocks limit are imposed.

Tim


--
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/