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: <20110329141853.GA23949@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 29 Mar 2011 10:18:53 -0400
From:	Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
To:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: block: eliminate ELEVATOR_INSERT_REQUEUE

On Tue, Mar 29 2011 at  7:56am -0400,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> wrote:

> On 2011-03-29 00:15, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 28 2011 at  4:23am -0400,
> > Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> > 
> >> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 12:21:56AM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> >>> Should blk_kick_flush() process the flush request without calling
> >>> elv_insert() -- like is done with open coded list_add() in
> >>> blk_insert_flush()?
> >>>
> >>> Or should blk_insert_flush() use elv_insert() with
> >>> ELEVATOR_INSERT_REQUEUE too? 
> >>
> >> Hmmm... I would prefer the latter.  Given that INSERT_REQUEUE and
> >> FRONT are no longer different, it would probably be better to use
> >> FRONT tho.  The only reason REQUEUE is used there is to avoid kicking
> >> the queue from elv_insert(), which is gone now.
> > 
> > OK, I came up with the following patch.
> > 
> > Jens, this is just a natural cleanup given the code that resulted from
> > the flush-merge and onstack plugging changes coming together.
> 
> That looks nice and clean. What kind of testing has been done?

I successfully tested it with that fsync-heavy ffsb workload (xfs on
mpath device).

Mike
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ