linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC 0/5] Ext4: Add support for blocksize < pagesize for dioread

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]

Date:   Mon, 4 Nov 2019 11:08:23 -0500
From:   "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To:     Matthew Bobrowski <mbobrowski@...browski.org>
Cc:     Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@...ux.ibm.com>, jack@...e.cz,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/5] Ext4: Add support for blocksize < pagesize for
 dioread_nolock

On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 09:49:14PM +1100, Matthew Bobrowski wrote:
> > It sure may be giving a merge conflict (due to io_end structure).
> > But this dioread_nolock series was not dependent over iomap series.
> 
> Uh ha. Well, there's been a chunk of code injected into
> ext4_end_io_dio() here and by me removing it, I'm not entirely sure
> what the downstream effects will be for this specific change...

Yeah, that was probably my failure to do the merge correctly; I'm
hoping that Ritesh will be able to fix that up.  If not we can throw
an "experimental" config to enable dioread_nolock on subpage
blocksizes, just to warn people that under some extreme workloads,
they might end up corrupting their allocation bitmap, which then might
lead to data loss.  I suspect it would actually work fine for most
users; but out of paranoia, if we can't figure out the generic/270
failure before the merge window, we can just make dioread_nolock_1k
experimental for now.

  	      	     	       		- Ted