linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/17] Add folio_end

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]

Message-ID: <CAHk-=wjU44TsEkoae6HuJi8JcTHMr01JSi_ZhiVTVSwpKvBtXA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 Sep 2023 17:31:43 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/17] Add folio_end_read

On Fri, 15 Sept 2023 at 11:37, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
<willy@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> I don't have any performance numbers; I'm hoping Nick might provide some
> since PPC seems particularly unhappy with write-after-write hazards.

I suspect you can't see the extra atomic in the IO paths.

The existing trick with bit #7 is because we do a lot of
page_lock/unlock pairs even when there is no actual IO. So it's worth
it because page_unlock() really traditionally shows up quite a bit.
But once you actually do IO, I think the effect is not measurable.

That said, the series doesn't look *wrong*, although I did note a few
things that just made me go "that looks very strange to me" in there.

                      Linus