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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 12:35:08 -0400 From: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com> To: Zach Brown <zab@...bo.net> Cc: Dave Kleikamp <dave.kleikamp@...cle.com>, "Maxim V. Patlasov" <mpatlasov@...allels.com>, "linux-fsdevel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 15/21] loop: use aio to perform io on the underlying file Zach Brown <zab@...bo.net> writes: > On 04/20/2012 11:20 AM, Jeff Moyer wrote: >> Dave Kleikamp<dave.kleikamp@...cle.com> writes: >> >>> On 04/20/2012 09:48 AM, Maxim V. Patlasov wrote: >>>> On 03/30/2012 07:43 PM, Dave Kleikamp wrote: >>>>> From: Zach Brown<zab@...bo.net> >>>>> >>>>> This uses the new kernel aio interface to process loopback IO by >>>>> submitting concurrent direct aio. Previously loop's IO was serialized >>>>> by synchronous processing in a thread. >>>>> >>>> >>>> The patch ignores REQ_FLUSH bit of bi_rw. Is it simply overlook? >>> >>> Good question. Since the loop device is sending only direct IO requests, >>> it shouldn't be necessary to explicitly flush page cache, but REQ_FLUSH >> >> REQ_FLUSH isn't about the page cache, it's about flushing the volatile >> disk write cache. You need to handle that. > > I guess O_DIRECT doesn't routinely issue flushes simply because it's too > expensive? Bypassing the page cache is different from bypassing the underlying device's cache. O_DIRECT does not mean "straight to platter". > Apps that care about consistent IO and O_DIRECT are expected to not > have writeback caching enabled? 'cause there's no way they're issuing > syncs themselves. They most certainly should be! The app should be written with the assumption that there is a write-back cache on the storage. Turning those flushes into noops is an optimization the OS performs. See this lwn article: http://lwn.net/Articles/457667/. Cheers, Jeff -- 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