linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/9] Sync and VFS scalability improvements

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: <20150316113938.GH4934@quack.suse.cz>
Date:	Mon, 16 Mar 2015 12:39:38 +0100
From:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:	Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>
Cc:	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, david@...morbit.com,
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, jack@...e.cz, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] Sync and VFS scalability improvements

On Tue 10-03-15 15:45:15, Josef Bacik wrote:
> These are patches that Dave Chinner wrote two years ago that are still very much
> needed today.  I recently ran into a problem where I had millions of inodes that
> needed to be evicted at unmount time and it soft locked up the box and kept any
> other file system from doing work.  These patches fix this problem by breaking
> the inode_sb_list_lock into per-sb, and then converting the per sb inode list
> into a list_lru for better scalability.
> 
> I've also pulled forward Dave's sync scalability patches which still seem pretty
> relevant.  I had to fix a couple of these to bring them forward but I touched
> very little and I've preserved the authorship of everything.  I added the
> Reviewed-by's that were there when the patches were originally submitted.  I've
> run this through xfstests on btrfs and xfs and verified that everything seems to
> be working.  If you are interested the original submission can be found here
> 
> http://lwn.net/Articles/561569/
> 
> Finally the last patch is from me and this fixes the softlockup problems I was
> seeing on unmount with a large amount of inodes that needed to be evicted.
   Just a general process note - when resending patches like this, you
should add your Signed-off-by. We know both you and Dave well so it's
mostly a cosmetic thing but it's better to do it anyway...

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
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/