linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 03/12] ext4: Remove bogus wait for unwritten extents in ext4_ind_direct

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: <20130122152117.GA32366@quack.suse.cz>
Date:	Tue, 22 Jan 2013 16:21:17 +0100
From:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:	Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org>
Cc:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Ted Tso <tytso@....edu>,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/12] ext4: Remove bogus wait for unwritten extents in
 ext4_ind_direct_IO

On Tue 22-01-13 18:12:38, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 14:44:00 +0100, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> wrote:
> > On Tue 22-01-13 15:11:24, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> > > On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 13:00:37 +0100, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> wrote:
> > > > When using indirect blocks there is no possibility to have any unwritten
> > > > extents. So wait for them in ext4_ind_direct_IO() is just bogus.
> > > But as soon as i remember indirect implementation may also be used by
> > > extents based inodes 3074: ext4_ext_direct_IO
> > >     /* Use the old path for reads and writes beyond i_size. */
> > >     if (rw != WRITE || final_size > inode->i_size)
> > >        return ext4_ind_direct_IO(rw, iocb, iov, offset, nr_segs);
> > > 
> > > Am I missing ?
> >   Ah, that's a catch. Thanks for pointing that out! So my patch is wrong
> > and that code path needs some cleaning and commenting. In particular I'm
> > afraid using dioread_nolock for inodes with indirect map causes data
> > exposure bugs when unlocked DIO read races with DIO write because such
> > inodes don't support uninitialized extents.
> Yes that's why dioread_nolock works only for extent based inodes
> 
> static inline int ext4_should_dioread_nolock(struct inode *inode)
> {
>         if (!test_opt(inode->i_sb, DIOREAD_NOLOCK))
>                 return 0;
>         if (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode))
>                 return 0;
>                 if (!(ext4_test_inode_flag(inode, EXT4_INODE_EXTENTS)))
>                    return 0;
>                    if (ext4_should_journal_data(inode))
>                 return 0;
>         return 1;
> }
  Sure, I was confused. Things work correctly just the code flow is a bit
confusing.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
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