Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 05:45:36 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Windsor <dave@...lcore.net>, "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 15/30] xfs: Define usercopy region in xfs_inode slab cache On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 10:31:26PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > Probably should. I've already been looking at killing the inline > extents array to simplify the management of the extent list (much > simpler to index by rbtree when we don't have direct/indirect > structures), so killing the inline data would get rid of the other > part of the union the inline data sits in. That's exactly where I came form with my extent list work. Although the rbtree performance was horrible due to the memory overhead and I've switched to a modified b+tree at the moment.. > OTOH, if we're going to have to dynamically allocate the memory for > the extent/inline data for the data fork, it may just be easier to > make the entire data fork a dynamic allocation (like the attr fork). I though about this a bit, but it turned out that we basically always need the data anyway, so I don't think it's going to buy us much unless we shrink the inode enough so that they better fit into a page.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.