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: <20120217221406.GJ29414@google.com>
Date:	Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:14:06 -0800
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Kent Overstreet <koverstreet@...gle.com>
Cc:	axboe@...nel.dk, vgoyal@...hat.com, ctalbott@...gle.com,
	rni@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] block: implement bio_associate_current()

Hello, Kent.

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 05:19:07PM -0800, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 02:37:56PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > This patch implements bio_associate_current() which associates the
> > specified bio with %current.  The bio will record the associated ioc
> > and blkcg at that point and block layer will use the recorded ones
> > regardless of which task actually ends up issuing the bio.  bio
> > release puts the associated ioc and blkcg.
> 
> Excellent.
> 
> Why not have bio_associate_current() called from submit_bio()? I would
> expect that's what we want most of the time, and the places it's not
> (mainly writeback) calling it before submit_bio() would do the right
> thing.
> 
> It'd make things more consistent - rq_ioc() could be dropped, and
> incorrect usage would be more obvious.

Yeah, maybe, I was mostly trying to avoid adding extra operations on
common paths as explicit task association isn't that common, at least
for now.  That said, I agree that things can be much cleaner just
allocating and associating stuff upfront - ie. always have ioc and
associate blkcg with IOs on issue.

If the associated blkcg is used consistently through block layer, it
might be better but cfq doesn't even do that.  It has its own icq ->
blkcg mapping, which it initializes on first cfqq association.  It
even ignores tasks migrating to a different cgroup and keeps using
whatever cgroup the task first issued IOs on. :(

I don't know.  Maybe someday.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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