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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2022 09:58:25 +0200 From: Sergei Shtepa <sergei.shtepa@...am.com> To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> CC: "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>, "linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/20] block, blksnap: snapshot image block device > On Thu, Jul 07, 2022 at 11:16:42AM +0200, Sergei Shtepa wrote: >> The module creates a block device for each snapshot image. >> To make a backup of a block device, the backup tool reads snapshot image. >> This snapshot image block device allows to mount a file system on it >> and perform the necessary preparation. If not for this requirement, >> it would be possible to implement reading via an additional ioctl. >> But that wouldn't be a good design, I think. > Ok, got it. It was just me who was confused. > >> Perhaps I have implemented this block device incorrectly? >> Processing requests of the snapshot image block device is started >> in the function snapimage_queue_rq(). And ends in the >> snapimage_queue_work() in another kernel thread. Therefore, when >> the request is initialized in snapimage_init_request(), a kernel worker >> is prepared. > I don't think it is wrong, but there is some potential for optimization. > > Is there a reson this is implemented as a blk-mq driver vs a bio > based driver that just implements ->submit_bio? The latter has > the advantage that you are always called in user context, and don't > need the extra workqueue offload. > > The block layer also generally assumes that blk-mq drivers don't > call submit_bio_noacct underneath, so if we can't I'd much > prefer the bio based driver approach here. > There was a goal to use the kernel innovations whenever possible. Of course, it makes sense to return to bio based if it allows to achieve better performance. This is not a matter of principle.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists