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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <6fc62631-fb6f-4207-badb-1964b20fa89a@huaweicloud.com> Date: Wed, 7 May 2025 16:23:06 +0800 From: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@...weicloud.com> To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, brauner@...nel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org, dm-devel@...ts.linux.dev, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tytso@....edu, john.g.garry@...cle.com, bmarzins@...hat.com, chaitanyak@...dia.com, shinichiro.kawasaki@....com, yi.zhang@...wei.com, chengzhihao1@...wei.com, yukuai3@...wei.com, yangerkun@...wei.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 07/11] fs: statx add write zeroes unmap attribute On 2025/5/6 23:55, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Tue, May 06, 2025 at 02:10:12PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Tue, May 06, 2025 at 07:25:06PM +0800, Zhang Yi wrote: >>> + if (request_mask & STATX_WRITE_ZEROES_UNMAP && >>> + bdev_write_zeroes_unmap(bdev)) >>> + stat->result_mask |= STATX_WRITE_ZEROES_UNMAP; >> >> That would be my expectation. But then again this area seems to >> confuse me a lot, so maybe we'll get Christian or Dave to chim in. > > Um... does STATX_WRITE_ZEROES_UNMAP protect a field somewhere? > It might be nice to expose the request alignment granularity/max > size/etc. I think that simply returning the support state is sufficient at the moment. __blkdev_issue_write_zeroes() will send write zeroes through multiple iterations, and there are no specific restrictions on the parameters provided by users. > Or does this flag exist solely to support discovering that > FALLOC_FL_WRITE_ZEROES is supported? In which case, why not discover > its existence by calling fallocate(fd, WRITE_ZEROES, 0, 0) like the > other modes? > Current STATX_WRITE_ZEROES_UNMAP and FALLOC_FL_WRITE_ZEROES are inconsistent, we allow users to call fallocate(FALLOC_FL_WRITE_ZEROES) on files that STATX_WRITE_ZEROES_UNMAP is not set. Users can check whether the device supports unmap write zeroes through STATX_WRITE_ZEROES_UNMAP and then decide to call fallocate(FALLOC_FL_WRITE_ZEROES) if it is supported. Please see this explanation for details. https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20250421021509.2366003-1-yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com/T/#mc1618822bc27d486296216fc1643d5531fee03e1 However, removing STATX_WRITE_ZEROES_UNMAP also seems good to me(Perhaps it would be better.).It means we do not allow to call fallocate(FALLOC_FL_WRITE_ZEROES) if the device does not explicitly support unmap write zeroes. Thanks, Yi.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists