linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] 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: <20150506073640.GA19532@infradead.org>
Date:	Wed, 6 May 2015 00:36:40 -0700
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Justin M. Forbes" <jforbes@...oraproject.org>,
	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	"v4.0" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] block: loop: avoiding too many pending per work I/O

On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 01:17:33PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> But I still prefer to dio/aio approach because double cache can
> be avoided, which is a big win in my previous tests.

Can yo respin and resend the patches?  With Al's iov_iter work and my
kiocb changes it should be fairly easy and non-intrusive to do.
--
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/