linux-kernel - Re: [patch 1/6] fs: icache RCU free inodes

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: <20101117060406.GA3928@amd>
Date:	Wed, 17 Nov 2010 17:04:06 +1100
From:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>
To:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>
Cc:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 1/6] fs: icache RCU free inodes

On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 04:56:33PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> So there. I re state my case. I have put up the numbers, and I have
> shown that even worst cases is not the end of the world. I don't know
> why I've had to repeat it so many times, but honestly at this point I've
> done enough. The case is closed until any *actual* significant numbers
> to the contrary turn up.

Same goes for per-zone LRUs, FWIW.

You can't ask submitter of every single change to prove a negative.

At some point you have to move on with life and accept that regressions
are inevitable, performance regressions are inevitable, and that we have
a development model that is well geared by now to tolerate and resolve
regressions.

--
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/