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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Thu, 14 Oct 2021 05:51:13 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] block: don't hide inode from block_device users

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 07:44:20PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> Mildly hot in io_uring w/o fixed files, but that's not peak perf,
> but would also be great to get rid of bdev->bd_inode dereference,
> e.g. lots of in fops.c.
> 
> Are you going to just hid the dereference in helpers or kill it
> with some offseting magic?

The only real hot path uses I found is the size (which you and Jens
already seem to have moved to use something out of the inode for the
fast path),  and maybe the blkbits for which we could do the same.

So basically the idea is to not touch the inode in the hot path,
and use accessors helpers in bdev.c that could do the offsetof trick.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ