linux-kernel - [RFC v4 Patch 0/4] fs/inode.c: optimization for inode lock usage

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1348219866-1799-1-git-send-email-yan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Fri, 21 Sep 2012 17:31:02 +0800
From:	Guo Chao <yan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk
Cc:	dchinner@...hat.com, hch@...radead.org, jack@...e.cz,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC v4 Patch 0/4] fs/inode.c: optimization for inode lock usage

This patchset optimizes several places which take the per inode spin lock.
They have not been fully tested yet, thus they are marked as RFC. 

I do limited tests after all patches applied: use two 'find' to traverse the 
filesystems and touch all files in parallel. This runs for several days in a 
virtual machine, no suspicious log appears. 

Guo Chao (4):
  fs/inode.c: do not take i_lock on newly allocated inode
  fs/inode.c: do not take i_lock in __(insert|remove)_inode_hash
  fs/inode.c: do not take i_lock when identify an inode
  fs/inode.c: always take i_lock before calling filesystem's test()
    method

 fs/inode.c |   32 +++++++++-----------------------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

-- 
1.7.9.5

--
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/