linux-kernel - Re: block device direct I/O fast path

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: <20161101175437.GC9797@kernel.dk>
Date:   Tue, 1 Nov 2016 11:54:37 -0600
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: block device direct I/O fast path

On Tue, Nov 01 2016, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 11:00:19AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > #2 is a bit more problematic, I'm pondering how we can implement that on
> > top of the bio approach. The nice thing about the request based approach
> > is that we have a 1:1 mapping with the unit on the driver side. And we
> > have a place to store the timer. I don't particularly love the embedded
> > timer, however, it'd be great to implement that differently. Trying to
> > think of options there, haven't found any yet.
> 
> I have a couple ideas for that.  Give me a few weeks and I'll send
> patches.

I'm not that patient :-)

For the SYNC part, it should be easy enough to do by just using an
on-stack hrtimer. I guess that will do for now, since we don't have
poll support for async O_DIRECT right now anyway.

http://git.kernel.dk/cgit/linux-block/commit/?h=for-4.10/dio&id=e96d9afd56791a61d463cb88f8f3b48393b71020

Untested, but should get the point across. I'll fire up a test box.

-- 
Jens Axboe