linux-kernel - Re: [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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20120921121717.GB24919@parisc-linux.org>
Date:	Fri, 21 Sep 2012 06:17:18 -0600
From:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
To:	Guo Chao <yan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, dchinner@...hat.com, hch@...radead.org,
	jack@...e.cz, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v4 Patch 0/4] fs/inode.c: optimization for inode lock
	usage

On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 05:31:02PM +0800, Guo Chao wrote:
> 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. 

Have you done any performance testing?  Taking and releasing a lock which
isn't contended is not particularly expensive.

-- 
Matthew Wilcox				Intel Open Source Technology Centre
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours.  We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."
--
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/