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]
Date:   Tue, 23 Jun 2020 11:22:36 -0400
From:   Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
To:     Ignat Korchagin <ignat@...udflare.com>
Cc:     Damien Le Moal <Damien.LeMoal@....com>,
        Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>,
        "dm-crypt@...ut.de" <dm-crypt@...ut.de>,
        "dm-devel@...hat.com" <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "agk@...hat.com" <agk@...hat.com>,
        "kernel-team@...udflare.com" <kernel-team@...udflare.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/1] dm-crypt excessive overhead

On Tue, Jun 23 2020 at 11:07am -0400,
Ignat Korchagin <ignat@...udflare.com> wrote:

> Do you think it may be better to break it in two flags: one for read
> path and one for write? So, depending on the needs and workflow these
> could be enabled independently?

If there is a need to split, then sure.  But I think Damien had a hard
requirement that writes had to be inlined but that reads didn't _need_
to be for his dm-zoned usecase.  Damien may not yet have assessed the
performance implications, of not have reads inlined, as much as you
have.

So let's see how Damien's work goes and if he trully doesn't need/want
reads to be inlined then 2 flags can be created.

Mike

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ