| 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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 09:04:59 -0500
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
To: Tao Ma <tm@....ma>
CC: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: Create helper function for EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN
and i_aiodio_unwritten.
On 8/16/11 2:06 AM, Tao Ma wrote:
> From: Tao Ma <boyu.mt@...bao.com>
>
> EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN flag set and the increase of i_aiodio_unwritten should
> be done simultaneously since ext4_end_io_nolock always clear the flag and
> decrease the counter in the same time.
>
> We have found some bugs that the flag is set while leaving i_aiodio_unwritten
> unchanged. So this patch just tries to creat a helper function to wrap them
> to avoid any future bug. The idea is inspired by Eric.
Although I like it a little less now that I see it in practice, sorry. ;)
This:
/*
* Flag the inode(non aio case) or end_io struct (aio case)
* that this IO needs to conversion to written when IO is
* completed
*/
if (!ext4_set_io_unwritten_flag(inode, io))
ext4_set_inode_state(inode, EXT4_STATE_DIO_UNWRITTEN);
just reads weirdly to me.
It encapsulates all the steps, but it really isn't intuitive to read, I think.
"If we (can't? don't?) set the io unwritten flag, set the dio unwritten flag
on the inode."
I wonder if changing "io" to "endio" would make it a little more obvious.
I'm not sure, maybe it's ok. What do others think?
I also wonder about this, but I get lost in this code. It was originally:
if (io && !(io->flag & EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN)) {
io->flag = EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN;
atomic_inc(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_aiodio_unwritten);
} else
ext4_set_inode_state(inode, EXT4_STATE_DIO_UNWRITTEN);
That means that if it is AIO ("if (io)"), but the flag is already set
(io->flag & EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN), we don't re-set the flag or increase
the count, which is fine - but is it then correct to set the state on the
inode?
thanks,
-Eric
> Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
> Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
> Signed-off-by: Tao Ma <boyu.mt@...bao.com>
> ---
> Ted,
> This patch is based on the patch with subject "ext4: Resolve the hang
> of direct i/o read in handling EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN.". I meant it for the next
> merge window, but if you think it is also ok for 3.1, go ahead.
>
> fs/ext4/ext4.h | 11 +++++++++++
> fs/ext4/extents.c | 10 ++--------
> fs/ext4/inode.c | 5 +----
> fs/ext4/page-io.c | 6 ++----
> 4 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/ext4.h b/fs/ext4/ext4.h
> index e717dfd..514f670 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/ext4.h
> +++ b/fs/ext4/ext4.h
> @@ -1247,6 +1247,17 @@ static inline int ext4_valid_inum(struct super_block *sb, unsigned long ino)
> ino <= le32_to_cpu(EXT4_SB(sb)->s_es->s_inodes_count));
> }
>
> +static inline int ext4_set_io_unwritten_flag(struct inode *inode,
> + struct ext4_io_end *io_end)
> +{
> + if (io_end && !(io_end->flag & EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN)) {
> + io_end->flag |= EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN;
> + atomic_inc(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_aiodio_unwritten);
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> /*
> * Inode dynamic state flags
> */
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c
> index 57cf568..c0f8655 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/extents.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c
> @@ -3190,10 +3190,7 @@ ext4_ext_handle_uninitialized_extents(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode,
> * that this IO needs to conversion to written when IO is
> * completed
> */
> - if (io && !(io->flag & EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN)) {
> - io->flag = EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN;
> - atomic_inc(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_aiodio_unwritten);
> - } else
> + if (!ext4_set_io_unwritten_flag(inode, io))
> ext4_set_inode_state(inode, EXT4_STATE_DIO_UNWRITTEN);
> if (ext4_should_dioread_nolock(inode))
> map->m_flags |= EXT4_MAP_UNINIT;
> @@ -3572,10 +3569,7 @@ int ext4_ext_map_blocks(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode,
> * that we need to perform conversion when IO is done.
> */
> if ((flags & EXT4_GET_BLOCKS_PRE_IO)) {
> - if (io && !(io->flag & EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN)) {
> - io->flag = EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN;
> - atomic_inc(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_aiodio_unwritten);
> - } else
> + if (!ext4_set_io_unwritten_flag(inode, io))
> ext4_set_inode_state(inode,
> EXT4_STATE_DIO_UNWRITTEN);
> }
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> index 40c0b10..128493b 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> @@ -2673,10 +2673,7 @@ static void ext4_end_io_buffer_write(struct buffer_head *bh, int uptodate)
> * but being more careful is always safe for the future change.
> */
> inode = io_end->inode;
> - if (!(io_end->flag & EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN)) {
> - io_end->flag |= EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN;
> - atomic_inc(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_aiodio_unwritten);
> - }
> + ext4_set_io_unwritten_flag(inode, io_end);
>
> /* Add the io_end to per-inode completed io list*/
> spin_lock_irqsave(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_completed_io_lock, flags);
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/page-io.c b/fs/ext4/page-io.c
> index 78839af..edd2f7b 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/page-io.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/page-io.c
> @@ -334,10 +334,8 @@ submit_and_retry:
> if ((io_end->num_io_pages >= MAX_IO_PAGES) &&
> (io_end->pages[io_end->num_io_pages-1] != io_page))
> goto submit_and_retry;
> - if (buffer_uninit(bh) && !(io_end->flag & EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN)) {
> - io_end->flag |= EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN;
> - atomic_inc(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_aiodio_unwritten);
> - }
> + if (buffer_uninit(bh))
> + ext4_set_io_unwritten_flag(inode, io_end);
> io->io_end->size += bh->b_size;
> io->io_next_block++;
> ret = bio_add_page(io->io_bio, bh->b_page, bh->b_size, bh_offset(bh));
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists