linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/5] aio: Rewrite refcounting

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: <20121009182755.GN26187@lenny.home.zabbo.net>
Date:	Tue, 9 Oct 2012 11:27:55 -0700
From:	Zach Brown <zab@...hat.com>
To:	Kent Overstreet <koverstreet@...gle.com>
Cc:	linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	dm-devel@...hat.com, tytso@....edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] aio: Rewrite refcounting

On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 11:39:18PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> The refcounting before wasn't very clear; there are two refcounts in
> struct kioctx, with an unclear relationship between them (or between
> them and ctx->dead).
> 
> Now, reqs_active holds a refcount on users (when reqs_active is
> nonzero), and the initial refcount is taken on reqs_active - when
> ctx->dead goes to 1, we drop that initial refcount.

I agree that it's a mess, but let's rethink this work on top of the
series I'm sending out that gets rid of the retry and cancel code.  It
makes the code a lot easier to follow.  (And Jens also has some patches
to take fewer locks in the submission path, we'll want to take them into
account too.)

- z
--
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/