linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6] block: loop: avoiding too many pending per work I/O

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: <20150501101737.GA18577@infradead.org>
Date:	Fri, 1 May 2015 03:17:37 -0700
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
Cc:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Justin M. Forbes" <jforbes@...oraproject.org>,
	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>,
	"v4.0" <stable@...r.kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] block: loop: avoiding too many pending per work I/O

On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 11:28:01AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> If there are too many pending per work I/O, too many
> high priority work thread can be generated so that
> system performance can be effected.
> 
> This patch limits the max pending per work I/O as 16,
> and will fackback to single queue mode when the max
> number is reached.

Why would you do this fall back?  Shouldn't we just communicate
a concurrency limit to the workqueue code?

--
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/