linux-kernel - Re: [patch 8/8] fs: add i_op->sync

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: <20110107072430.GA32308@infradead.org>
Date:	Fri, 7 Jan 2011 02:24:30 -0500
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 8/8] fs: add i_op->sync_inode

On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 03:47:34PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> No, you misunderstand 1. I am saying they should be treated as
> WB_SYNC_NONE.
> 
> In fact 2 would cause much more IO, because dirty writeout would
> never clean them so it will just keep writing them out. I don't
> know how 2 could be feasible.

WB_SYNC_NONE means ->write_inode behaves non-blocking.  That is
we do not block on memory allocations, and we do not take locks
blocking.  Most journaling filesystems currently take the easy
way out an make it a no-op due to that, but take a look at XFS
how complicated it is to avoid the blocking if you want a non-noop
implementation.

> So, back to my original question: what is the performance problem
> with treating write_inode as WB_SYNC_NONE, and then having .fsync
> and .sync_fs do the integrity?

See above - we'll block in the flusher thread and cause it to stall,
which is really nasty as it does all data I/O writeback.  The salling
may also block sync() although I don't think it's as important there.

--
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/