linux-kernel - Re: aio poll V22 (aka 2.0)

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: <20180807072702.GB678@lst.de>
Date:   Tue, 7 Aug 2018 09:27:02 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Avi Kivity <avi@...lladb.com>, linux-aio@...ck.org,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: aio poll V22 (aka 2.0)

On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 09:49:24AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I'm not seeing what's painful for this. Looking at the patches, this
> is *much* more straightforward than your previous patch,
> 
> It adds refcounting to aio_iocb, but that's *much* better than messing
> up every other subsystem.
> 
> Or is there some follow-up patches that are pending but you didn't
> post that are the painful part? Because the diffstat says that this
> second version is *way* less painful, at about 200 lines of code in a
> couple of files, mostly aio, vs ~700 lines of changes all over the
> place, together with a performance regression.

It requires additional lock roundtrips and very strange life time
rules.  But we've already established that our preference here are
different, so I'm not surprised by your different view.