From: Wang Sheng-Hui <crosslonelyover@gmail.com>
To: linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors <kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org>,
tytso@mit.edu, adilger@sun.com, akpm@linux-fou
Subject: Re: [PATCH] check name_len before down_read xattr_sem and sb_read
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 14:28:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C3C7803.2020006@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201007122229025316610@gmail.com>
于 2010-7-12 22:29, crosslonelyover 写道:
> Hi,
> I walked through ext2_xattr_get, and felt that we can
> do some optimization on it. For name_len check, it's done
> after down xattr_sem and sb_read, both of which are time
> consuming operation compared with strlen:
> down_read(&EXT2_I(inode)->xattr_sem);
> ...
> bh = sb_bread(inode->i_sb, EXT2_I(inode)->i_file_acl);
> ...
> /* find named attribute */
> name_len = strlen(name);
>
> error = -ERANGE;
> if (name_len> 255)
> goto cleanup;
>
> Most of the case, you'll get one valid block, but if the
> name len> 255, then the xattr_sem down and sb_bread operation
> can be seen as a waste of time. So I think we'd better do
> name len check as early as possible.
> Following is my patch, and it's against 2.6.35-rc4.
> Please check it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Sheng-Hui<crosslonelyover@gmail.com>
> ---
> fs/ext2/xattr.c | 12 +++++++-----
> 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext2/xattr.c b/fs/ext2/xattr.c
> index 7c39157..0b94d61 100644
> --- a/fs/ext2/xattr.c
> +++ b/fs/ext2/xattr.c
> @@ -161,6 +161,13 @@ ext2_xattr_get(struct inode *inode, int name_index, const char *name,
>
> if (name = NULL)
> return -EINVAL;
> +
> + /* find named attribute */
> + name_len = strlen(name);
> + error = -ERANGE;
> + if (name_len> 255)
> + goto cleanup;
> +
> down_read(&EXT2_I(inode)->xattr_sem);
> error = -ENODATA;
> if (!EXT2_I(inode)->i_file_acl)
> @@ -181,12 +188,7 @@ bad_block: ext2_error(inode->i_sb, "ext2_xattr_get",
> error = -EIO;
> goto cleanup;
> }
> - /* find named attribute */
> - name_len = strlen(name);
>
> - error = -ERANGE;
> - if (name_len> 255)
> - goto cleanup;
> entry = FIRST_ENTRY(bh);
> while (!IS_LAST_ENTRY(entry)) {
> struct ext2_xattr_entry *next Hi, I noticed in ext2_xattr_set, name_len check is done
before
down_write(&EXT2_I(inode)->xattr_sem);
So I think ext2_xattr_get should do in the same way.
Please check this patch.
--
Thanks and Regards,
shenghui
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Wang Sheng-Hui <crosslonelyover@gmail.com>
To: linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors <kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org>,
tytso@mit.edu, adilger@sun.com, akpm@linux-fou
Subject: Re: [PATCH] check name_len before down_read xattr_sem and sb_read in ext2_xattr_get
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 22:28:19 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C3C7803.2020006@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201007122229025316610@gmail.com>
于 2010-7-12 22:29, crosslonelyover 写道:
> Hi,
> I walked through ext2_xattr_get, and felt that we can
> do some optimization on it. For name_len check, it's done
> after down xattr_sem and sb_read, both of which are time
> consuming operation compared with strlen:
> down_read(&EXT2_I(inode)->xattr_sem);
> ...
> bh = sb_bread(inode->i_sb, EXT2_I(inode)->i_file_acl);
> ...
> /* find named attribute */
> name_len = strlen(name);
>
> error = -ERANGE;
> if (name_len> 255)
> goto cleanup;
>
> Most of the case, you'll get one valid block, but if the
> name len> 255, then the xattr_sem down and sb_bread operation
> can be seen as a waste of time. So I think we'd better do
> name len check as early as possible.
> Following is my patch, and it's against 2.6.35-rc4.
> Please check it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Sheng-Hui<crosslonelyover@gmail.com>
> ---
> fs/ext2/xattr.c | 12 +++++++-----
> 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext2/xattr.c b/fs/ext2/xattr.c
> index 7c39157..0b94d61 100644
> --- a/fs/ext2/xattr.c
> +++ b/fs/ext2/xattr.c
> @@ -161,6 +161,13 @@ ext2_xattr_get(struct inode *inode, int name_index, const char *name,
>
> if (name == NULL)
> return -EINVAL;
> +
> + /* find named attribute */
> + name_len = strlen(name);
> + error = -ERANGE;
> + if (name_len> 255)
> + goto cleanup;
> +
> down_read(&EXT2_I(inode)->xattr_sem);
> error = -ENODATA;
> if (!EXT2_I(inode)->i_file_acl)
> @@ -181,12 +188,7 @@ bad_block: ext2_error(inode->i_sb, "ext2_xattr_get",
> error = -EIO;
> goto cleanup;
> }
> - /* find named attribute */
> - name_len = strlen(name);
>
> - error = -ERANGE;
> - if (name_len> 255)
> - goto cleanup;
> entry = FIRST_ENTRY(bh);
> while (!IS_LAST_ENTRY(entry)) {
> struct ext2_xattr_entry *next =
Hi, I noticed in ext2_xattr_set, name_len check is done
before
down_write(&EXT2_I(inode)->xattr_sem);
So I think ext2_xattr_get should do in the same way.
Please check this patch.
--
Thanks and Regards,
shenghui
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Wang Sheng-Hui <crosslonelyover@gmail.com>
To: linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors <kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org>,
tytso@mit.edu, adilger@sun.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] check name_len before down_read xattr_sem and sb_read in ext2_xattr_get
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 22:28:19 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C3C7803.2020006@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201007122229025316610@gmail.com>
于 2010-7-12 22:29, crosslonelyover 写道:
> Hi,
> I walked through ext2_xattr_get, and felt that we can
> do some optimization on it. For name_len check, it's done
> after down xattr_sem and sb_read, both of which are time
> consuming operation compared with strlen:
> down_read(&EXT2_I(inode)->xattr_sem);
> ...
> bh = sb_bread(inode->i_sb, EXT2_I(inode)->i_file_acl);
> ...
> /* find named attribute */
> name_len = strlen(name);
>
> error = -ERANGE;
> if (name_len> 255)
> goto cleanup;
>
> Most of the case, you'll get one valid block, but if the
> name len> 255, then the xattr_sem down and sb_bread operation
> can be seen as a waste of time. So I think we'd better do
> name len check as early as possible.
> Following is my patch, and it's against 2.6.35-rc4.
> Please check it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Sheng-Hui<crosslonelyover@gmail.com>
> ---
> fs/ext2/xattr.c | 12 +++++++-----
> 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext2/xattr.c b/fs/ext2/xattr.c
> index 7c39157..0b94d61 100644
> --- a/fs/ext2/xattr.c
> +++ b/fs/ext2/xattr.c
> @@ -161,6 +161,13 @@ ext2_xattr_get(struct inode *inode, int name_index, const char *name,
>
> if (name == NULL)
> return -EINVAL;
> +
> + /* find named attribute */
> + name_len = strlen(name);
> + error = -ERANGE;
> + if (name_len> 255)
> + goto cleanup;
> +
> down_read(&EXT2_I(inode)->xattr_sem);
> error = -ENODATA;
> if (!EXT2_I(inode)->i_file_acl)
> @@ -181,12 +188,7 @@ bad_block: ext2_error(inode->i_sb, "ext2_xattr_get",
> error = -EIO;
> goto cleanup;
> }
> - /* find named attribute */
> - name_len = strlen(name);
>
> - error = -ERANGE;
> - if (name_len> 255)
> - goto cleanup;
> entry = FIRST_ENTRY(bh);
> while (!IS_LAST_ENTRY(entry)) {
> struct ext2_xattr_entry *next =
Hi, I noticed in ext2_xattr_set, name_len check is done
before
down_write(&EXT2_I(inode)->xattr_sem);
So I think ext2_xattr_get should do in the same way.
Please check this patch.
--
Thanks and Regards,
shenghui
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-13 14:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-12 14:29 [PATCH] check name_len before down_read xattr_sem and sb_read in ext2_xattr_get crosslonelyover
2010-07-12 14:29 ` crosslonelyover
2010-07-13 14:28 ` Wang Sheng-Hui [this message]
2010-07-13 14:28 ` Wang Sheng-Hui
2010-07-13 14:28 ` Wang Sheng-Hui
2010-07-13 14:56 ` [PATCH] check name_len before down_read xattr_sem and sb_read Dan Carpenter
2010-07-13 14:56 ` [PATCH] check name_len before down_read xattr_sem and sb_read in ext2_xattr_get Dan Carpenter
2010-07-21 17:44 ` [PATCH] check name_len before down_read xattr_sem and sb_read Jan Kara
2010-07-21 17:44 ` [PATCH] check name_len before down_read xattr_sem and sb_read in ext2_xattr_get Jan Kara
2010-07-22 0:03 ` [PATCH] check name_len before down_read xattr_sem and sb_read in shenghui
2010-07-22 0:03 ` [PATCH] check name_len before down_read xattr_sem and sb_read in ext2_xattr_get shenghui
2010-07-22 0:03 ` shenghui
2010-07-23 8:37 ` [PATCH] check name_len before down_read xattr_sem and sb_read Jan Kara
2010-07-23 8:37 ` [PATCH] check name_len before down_read xattr_sem and sb_read in ext2_xattr_get Jan Kara
2010-07-23 8:37 ` Jan Kara
2010-07-23 12:46 ` [PATCH] check name_len before down_read xattr_sem and sb_read Ted Ts'o
2010-07-23 12:46 ` [PATCH] check name_len before down_read xattr_sem and sb_read in ext2_xattr_get Ted Ts'o
2010-07-25 13:12 ` [PATCH] check name_len before down_read xattr_sem and sb_read in shenghui
2010-07-25 13:12 ` [PATCH] check name_len before down_read xattr_sem and sb_read in ext2_xattr_get shenghui
2010-07-25 13:12 ` shenghui
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4C3C7803.2020006@gmail.com \
--to=crosslonelyover@gmail.com \
--cc=adilger@sun.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-fou \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.