| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAEsagEirOdtisf5DrnmnEsfdWpAt31qDm9rwD_i4LhmBgYoPVw@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 00:22:18 -0700 From: Daniel Phillips <daniel.raymond.phillips@...il.com> To: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp> Cc: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, "tux3@...3.org" <tux3@...3.org>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Optimize wait_sb_inodes() On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:18 PM, OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp> wrote: > ...vfs can't know the data is whether after sync point or before > sync point, and have to wait or not. FS is using the behavior like > data=journal has tracking of those already, and can reuse it. Clearly showing why the current interface is inefficient. In the old days, core liked to poke its nose into the buffers of every fs too, and those days are thankfully gone (thanks to akpm iirc). Maybe the days of core sticking its nose into the the inode dirty state of every fs are soon to end as well. Why does core even need to know about the inodes a fs is using? Maybe for some filesystems it saves implementation code, but for Tux3 it just wastes CPU and adds extra code. Regards, Daniel -- 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