linux-kernel - Re: Recent kernel "mount" slow

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]

Date:	Sun, 25 Nov 2012 07:23:14 +0800
From:	Jeff Chua <jeff.chua.linux@...il.com>
To:	Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
Cc:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Recent kernel "mount" slow

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 5:09 AM, Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com> wrote:
> So it's better to slow down mount.

I am quite proud of the linux boot time pitting against other OS. Even
with 10 partitions. Linux can boot up in just a few seconds, but now
you're saying that we need to do this semaphore check at boot up. By
doing so, it's inducing additional 4 seconds during boot up.

What about moving the locking mechanism to the "mount" program itself?
Won't that be more feasible?

As for the cases of simultaneous mounts, it's usually administrator
that's doing something bad. I would say this is not a kernel issue.

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/