linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] dax, ext4: Synchronous page faults

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: <20170821195751.GE26220@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 21 Aug 2017 13:57:51 -0600
From:   Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc:     Boaz Harrosh <boazh@...app.com>, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
        Amit Golander <amitg@...app.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] dax, ext4: Synchronous page faults

On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 09:03:59AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 7:04 AM, Boaz Harrosh <boazh@...app.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you Jan, I'm patiently waiting for this MAP_SYNC flag since I asked for
> > it in 2014. I'm so glad its time is finally do.
> >
> > Thank you for working on this. Please CC me on future patches.
> > (note the new Netapp email)
> >
> > On 13/08/17 12:25, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >> On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 07:44:14PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> >>> How about MAP_SYNC == (MAP_SHARED|MAP_PRIVATE)? On older kernels that
> >>> should get -EINVAL, and on new kernels it means SYNC+SHARED.
> >>
> >> Cute trick, but I'd hate to waster it just for our little flag.
> >>
> >> How about:
> >>
> >> #define __MAP_VALIDATE                MAP_SHARED|MAP_PRIVATE
> >> #define MAP_SYNC              0x??? | __MAP_VALIDATE
> >>
> >> so that we can reuse that trick for any new flag?
> >>
> >
> > YES! And please create a mask for all new flags and in validation
> > code if ((m_flags & __MAP_VALIDATE) == __MAP_VALIDATE) then you
> > want that (m_flags & __MAP_NEWFLAGS) does not come empty, this
> > way you actually preserve the old check that SHARED and PRIVATE
> > do not co exist.
> >
> > Few Comments on this new MAP_ flag
> >
> > 0] The name at least needs to be MAP_MSYNC because only meta-data is
> >     synced not the data pointed to. That is the responsibility of the app
> >
> > 1] This flag you have named MAP_SYNC but it is very much related to
> >    dax and the ability for user-mode to "flush" the data pointed by this
> >    now "synced" meta data.
> >    For example in ext4, this flag set on an inode that is *not* IS_DAX
> >    should fail the mmap. Because there is no point of synced meta if the
> >    data is actually in page-cache and we know for sure it was not yet synced,
> >    And there is no way for user-mode to directly "sync" the data as well.
> >
> > 2] The code should be constructed that the default check for the MAP_SYNC
> >    should fail, and only Hopped in FSs are allowed.
> >    (So not to modify all Implementations of file_operations->mmap() )
> >
> > 3] /dev/pmem could start serving DAX pages in mmap, if asked for MAP_MSYNC
> >    (which is also an API that says "I know I need to cl_flush". See 1. )
> >
> > 4] Once we have this flag. And properly implemented at least in one FS
> >    and optionally in /dev/pmemX we no longer have any justification for
> >    /dev/daxX and it can die a slow and happy death.
> 
> I'm all for replacing /dev/dax with filesystem equivalent
> functionality, but I don't think MAP_SYNC gets us fully there. That's
> what the MAP_DIRECT proposal [1] is meant to address.
> 
> [1]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/8/13/160

I think we may also need to get DAX working on raw block devices again before
/dev/dax can go away.  AFAIK some customers still prefer to use DAX on a
per-device basis and not have a filesystem.