| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 22:39:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com> To: device-mapper development <dm-devel@...hat.com> cc: Milan Broz <mbroz@...hat.com>, ak@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, agk@...hat.com Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH] DM-CRYPT: Scale to multiple CPUs > > >> 2) Per volume threads and mempools were added to solve low memory > > >> problems (exhausted mempools), isn't now possible deadlock here again? > > > > > > Increasing the number of parallel submitters does not increase deadlocks > > > with mempool as long as they don't nest. They would just > > > block each other, but eventually make progress as one finishes. > > > > I mean if they nest of course, sorry for confusion. > > No change to that, it's the same as it always worked. > > Anyways, Right now you would need to nest more than 16 times I think > to exhaust the mempool (or 8, but the pages are less critical I think) > > For me that seems like a "don't do that if hurts" situation. If the mempools are per-instance (they are), it can nest any number of times, because each nested instance will get new mempools. It is not a problem. Mikulas -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists