linux-kernel - Re: [HELP] FUSE writeback performance bottleneck

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]

Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 09:20:32 +0200
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: Bernd Schubert <bernd.schubert@...tmail.fm>, Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@...ux.alibaba.com>, 
	"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, lege.wang@...uarmicro.com
Subject: Re: [HELP] FUSE writeback performance bottleneck

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 at 00:10, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> wrote:

> I thought we had PR_SET_IO_FLUSHER for that. Requires
> CAP_SYS_RESOURCES but no other privileges, then the userspace
> server will then always operate in PF_MEMALLOC_NOIO |
> PF_LOCAL_THROTTLE memory allocation context.

There could be any number of services that are being used while
serving a fuse request.  There's no well defined "fuse server
process", as many people seem to think.  Any approach depending on
somehow marking the fuse server as a special entity will fail.

Thanks,
Miklos