linux-kernel - Re: open(2) says O_DIRECT works on 512 byte boundries?

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: <x49iqnyi0ih.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:40:22 -0500
From:	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
To:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:	mtk.manpages@...il.com, Robert Hancock <hancockr@...w.ca>,
	linux-man@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: open(2) says O_DIRECT works on 512 byte boundries?

Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> writes:

> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 03:59:12PM +1300, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 06:41:49PM -0600, Robert Hancock wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Greg KH wrote:
>> >>> In looking at open(2), it says that O_DIRECT works on 512 byte boundries
>> >>> with the 2.6 kernel release:
>> >>>      Under Linux 2.4, transfer sizes, and the alignment of the user
>> >>>      buffer and  the file offset must all be multiples of the logical
>> >>>      block size of the file system.  Under Linux 2.6, alignment  to
>> >>>      512-byte  boundaries suffices.
>> >>> However if you try to access an O_DIRECT opened file with a buffer that
>> >>> is PAGE_SIZE aligned + 512 bytes, it fails in a bad way (wrong data is
>> >>> read.)
>> >>> Is this just a mistake in the documentation?  Or am I reading it
>> >>> incorrectly?
>> >>> I have a test program that shows this if anyone wants it.
>> >>
>> >> Well, it sounds like a bug to me.. even if it's not supported, if you do
>> >> such an access, surely the kernel should detect that and return EINVAL or
>> >> something rather than reading corrupted data..
>> >
>> > It doesn't.  It says the read is successful, yet the data is not really
>> > read into the buffer.  Portions of it is, but not the amount we asked
>> > for.
>> 
>> Greg,
>> 
>> Can you post your test program?
>
> Sure, here it is.  I'm still not quite sure it is valid, but at first
> glance it seems to be.
>
> Run it once with no arguments and all of the files will be created.
> Then run it again with no offset being asked for:
> 	./dma_thread -a 0
> then with an offset:
> 	./dma_thread -a 512
>
> The second one breaks.

There are several folks working on this.  See "Corruption with O_DIRECT
and unaligned user buffers" on the linux-fsdevel list.  There is also a
Red Hat bugzilla for this (471613) that several folks have been working
through.

Cheers,
Jeff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/