linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next RFC v2 8/8] sbitmap: wake up the number of threads based on required tags

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: <fc82d24f-51d8-5f8c-1a44-6c95da722f54@acm.org>
Date:   Fri, 8 Apr 2022 21:16:34 -0700
From:   Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To:     "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>, axboe@...nel.dk,
        andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, john.garry@...wei.com,
        ming.lei@...hat.com
Cc:     linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        yi.zhang@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next RFC v2 8/8] sbitmap: wake up the number of threads
 based on required tags

On 4/8/22 19:17, yukuai (C) wrote:
> I think the reason to wake up 'wake_batch' waiters is to make sure
> wakers will use up 'wake_batch' tags that is just freed, because each
> wakers should aquire at least one tag. Thus I think if we can make sure
> wakers will use up 'wake_batch' tags, it's ok to wake up less waiters.

Hmm ... I think it's up to you to (a) explain this behavior change in 
detail in the commit message and (b) to prove that this behavior change 
won't cause trouble (I guess this change will cause trouble).

Thanks,

Bart.