linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 0/2 v2] Fix O

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20130904105450.GB3996@quack.suse.cz>
Date:	Wed, 4 Sep 2013 12:54:50 +0200
From:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, xfs@....sgi.com,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2 v2] Fix O_SYNC AIO DIO

On Fri 30-08-13 16:53:01, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 11:10:54AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> >   Hello,
> > 
> >   this is second iteration of patches to fix handling of O_SYNC AIO DIO.
> > Since previous version I've addressed Dave's comments:
> >  - slightly expanded changelog of the first patch
> >  - workqueue is now created with parameters allowing paralelism
> >  - workqueue name contains sb->s_id
> >  - workqueue is created on demand (I decided to do this to reduce the overhead
> >    in unnecessary cases)
> > 
> > The patchset survives xfstests run for ext4 & xfs so it should be sane. Since
> > this touches several filesystems (although only ext4 & xfs are non-trivial),
> > the question is who should carry these patches. Maybe Al? But since xfs and
> > ext4 changes are non-trivial, I'd like to have a review from their
> > developers...
> 
> Looks sane, except that I'd probably put destroying the queue after
> evict_inodes(), next to ->put_super() call.
  OK, I've changed that. I'll send v3 in a moment.

> Said that, there's another interesting problem in the code affected by that
> sucker: generic_file_aio_write() might very well sync the wrong range.
> Consider O_APPEND case; __generic_file_aio_write() will call
> generic_write_checks(), which will update its copy of pos, and proceed to
> write starting from there.  All right and proper, but then we return into
> generic_file_aio_write() and sync the range of the right length, starting
> at the *original* value of pos...
  Yes, that looks like a bug. I was looking into how we could fix that and
the easiest seems to be to move generic_segment_checks() and
generic_write_checks() from __generic_file_aio_write() to
generic_file_aio_write(). There are only three callers of
__generic_file_aio_write(). cifs_writev() which can and should use
generic_file_aio_write() anyway, ext4_file_dio_write() which could use
generic_file_aio_write() if we cleaned up the code and moved it around a
bit, and blkdev_aio_write() which really needs to call
__generic_file_aio_write() (it doesn't want to grab i_mutex). So that last
caller would need to do the moved checks manually.

But this all seems a bit complex so I'd prefer to do it as a separate
series.

								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