linux-kernel - Re: [linux-next:master] [lockref] d042dae6ad: unixbench.throughput -33.7% regression

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: <CAHk-=wg6e8QMaBOyFaGon7pik_C1COrkmEz37mtUqpBoq=R44w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2024 13:42:48 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>, oe-lkp@...ts.linux.dev, 
	lkp@...el.com, Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	ying.huang@...el.com, feng.tang@...el.com, fengwei.yin@...el.com
Subject: Re: [linux-next:master] [lockref] d042dae6ad: unixbench.throughput
 -33.7% regression

On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 at 13:33, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com> wrote:
>
> If you are politely by lkml standards suggesting I should probably drop
> the idea due to unforseen complexities

Oh, absolutely not. I'd love to see how nasty - or not nasty - the
patch would end up being. I think it would be very interesting.

I'm just explaining why _I_ never got around to it.

I do think that the 'stat()' family of syscalls are some of the most
critical system calls out there. And while I suspect the benchmarks
that stat the same file over and over in parallel are worthless, if we
can do 'stat()' without ever even dirtying the dentry at all, that
would be absolutely lovely.

           Linus