linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 11/18] fs: Introduce per-bucket inode hash locks

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: <20101008073306.GD7831@lst.de>
Date:	Fri, 8 Oct 2010 03:33:06 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/18] fs: Introduce per-bucket inode hash locks

On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 04:21:25PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
> 
> Protect the inod hash with a single lock is not scalable.  Convert

s/inod/inode/

>  	p = &root->inode_tree.rb_node;
>  	parent = NULL;
>  
> -	if (hlist_unhashed(&inode->i_hash))
> +	if (hlist_bl_unhashed(&inode->i_hash))

Maybe introduce an inode_unhashed helper for this check which we're
doing in quite a lot of places?

Otherwise looks good,


Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
--
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/