linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ext4: Modify the rec_len helpers to accommodate future cases

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CANubcdW1z4QqDsHuuTqGxa_P40uG2s6LRk=pCkk_zL0TmJULrg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 19 Aug 2023 10:38:02 +0800
From:   Stephen Zhang <starzhangzsd@...il.com>
To:     "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc:     adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, zhangshida@...inos.cn,
        Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: Modify the rec_len helpers to accommodate future cases

Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> 于2023年8月18日周五 01:31写道：
>
> On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 09:26:54AM +0800, zhangshida wrote:
> > From: Shida Zhang <zhangshida@...inos.cn>
> >
> > Following Andreas' suggestion, it is time to adapt these helpers
> > to handle larger records during runtime, especially in preparation
> > for the eventual support of ext4 with a block size greater than
> > PAGE_SIZE.
>
> Is there a reason for landing this now?  We don't have support for
> block_size > PAGE_SIZE yet, and this patch doesn't come for free, at
> least not systems with page_size < 64k.  These inline functions are
> *very* hot and get used in a large number of places.  Have you looked
> to see what it might do to text size of the ext4 code?  And whether
> the expansion to the icache might actually impact performance on CPU
> bound workloads with very large directories?
>
> I will note that there are some opportunities to optimize how often we
> use ext4_rec_len_from_disk.  For example, it gets called from
> ext4_check_dir_entry(), and often the callers of that function will
> need the directory record length.  So having ext4_check_dir_entry()
> optionally fill in the rec_len via a passed-in pointer might be
> worthwhile.

Yep, the best way to do it is to leave it unmerged until it is necessary.
At the same time, I will try to eliminate these regression concerns based
on these suggestions.

Cheers,
Shida

>
> Cheers,
>
>                                                 - Ted