linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] cleancache: remove limit on the number of cleancache enabled filesystems

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: <20150306151426.GB4808@l.oracle.com>
Date:	Fri, 6 Mar 2015 10:14:26 -0500
From:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
To:	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...allels.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
	Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@...e.com>,
	Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>,
	Stefan Hengelein <ilendir@...glemail.com>,
	Florian Schmaus <fschmaus@...il.com>,
	Andor Daam <andor.daam@...glemail.com>,
	Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>,
	Bob Liu <lliubbo@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] cleancache: remove limit on the number of cleancache
 enabled filesystems

On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 07:46:36PM +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 04:22:30PM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 01:34:06PM +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:12:22AM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > > Thank you for posting these patches. I was wondering if you had
> > > > run through some of the different combinations that you can
> > > > load the filesystems/tmem drivers in random order? The #4 patch
> > > > deleted a nice chunk of documentation that outlines the different
> > > > combinations.
> > > 
> > > Yeah, I admit the synchronization between cleancache_register_ops and
> > > cleancache_init_fs is far not obvious. I should have updated the comment
> > > instead of merely dropping it, sorry. What about the following patch
> > > proving correctness of register_ops-vs-init_fs synchronization? It is
> > > meant to be applied incrementally on top of patch #4.
> > 
> > Just fold it in please. But more importantly - I was wondering if you
> > had run throught the different combinations it outlines?
> 
> Ah, you mean testing - I misunderstood you at first, sorry.
> 
> Of course, I checked that a cleancache backend module works fine no
> matter if it is loaded before or after a filesystem is mounted. However,
> I used our own cleancache driver for testing (we are trying to use
> cleancache for containers).
> 
> To be 100% sure that I did not occasionally break anything, today I
> installed XenServer on my test machine, enabled tmem both in dom0 and
> domU, and ran through all possible sequences of tmem load vs fs
> mount/use/unmount described in the old comment.

Wow!

Well then, I think this patchset is ready to go then!

Would you be willing to fold in the description in the patch #4 and repost it?

Andrew - are you OK picking it up or would you prefer me as the maintainer
to feed it to Linus? [either option is fine with me]

> 
> Thanks,
> Vladimir
--
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/