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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20101008075109.GU4681@dastard>
Date:	Fri, 8 Oct 2010 18:51:09 +1100
From:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
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 03:33:06AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> 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?

Ok, makes sense.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com
--
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/