[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F09A006.8080104@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2012 21:54:14 +0800
From: Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
CC: axboe@...nel.dk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] loop: zero fill bio instead of return -EIO for partial
read
On 01/07/2012 03:22 AM, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com> writes:
>
>> commit 8268f5a7415d914fc855a86aa2284ac819dc6b2e trying to fix the loop device
>> partial read information leak problem. But it changed the semantics of read
>> behavior. When we read beyond the end of the device we should get 0 bytes,
>> which is normal behavior, we should not just return -EIO
>>
>> Instead of return -EIO, zero out the bio to avoid information leak in case of
>> partail read.
>
> I tested the patch with a program which patterns the loop device,
> truncates the backing file, and then performs preads from various
> offsets within the loop device, validates the return values and inspects
> the contents. With this patch, everything works as expected.
Many thanks for review and test
>
> By the way, truncating the backing file for a loop device is insane.
> Why would you do that? Also, if you really want all of the data gone,
> you'll have to flush the contents of the buffer cache for the loop
> device first. It's quite the head scratcher the first time you truncate
> a file, wait a few seconds, and then witness the file size grow. ;-)
I think nobody will intend to do that, but random operations could cause
this happen..
>
> Reviewed-by: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/block/loop.c | 24 +++++++++++++-----------
>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>
>> --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/block/loop.c 2012-01-06 11:19:48.000000000 +0800
>> +++ linux-2.6/drivers/block/loop.c 2012-01-06 11:20:18.842630580 +0800
>> @@ -357,14 +357,14 @@ lo_direct_splice_actor(struct pipe_inode
>> return __splice_from_pipe(pipe, sd, lo_splice_actor);
>> }
>>
>> -static int
>> +static ssize_t
>> do_lo_receive(struct loop_device *lo,
>> struct bio_vec *bvec, int bsize, loff_t pos)
>> {
>> struct lo_read_data cookie;
>> struct splice_desc sd;
>> struct file *file;
>> - long retval;
>> + ssize_t retval;
>>
>> cookie.lo = lo;
>> cookie.page = bvec->bv_page;
>> @@ -380,26 +380,28 @@ do_lo_receive(struct loop_device *lo,
>> file = lo->lo_backing_file;
>> retval = splice_direct_to_actor(file, &sd, lo_direct_splice_actor);
>>
>> - if (retval < 0)
>> - return retval;
>> - if (retval != bvec->bv_len)
>> - return -EIO;
>> - return 0;
>> + return retval;
>> }
>>
>> static int
>> lo_receive(struct loop_device *lo, struct bio *bio, int bsize, loff_t pos)
>> {
>> struct bio_vec *bvec;
>> - int i, ret = 0;
>> + ssize_t s;
>> + int i;
>>
>> bio_for_each_segment(bvec, bio, i) {
>> - ret = do_lo_receive(lo, bvec, bsize, pos);
>> - if (ret < 0)
>> + s = do_lo_receive(lo, bvec, bsize, pos);
>> + if (s < 0)
>> + return s;
>> +
>> + if (s != bvec->bv_len) {
>> + zero_fill_bio(bio);
>> break;
>> + }
>> pos += bvec->bv_len;
>> }
>> - return ret;
>> + return 0;
>> }
>>
>> static int do_bio_filebacked(struct loop_device *lo, struct bio *bio)
--
Thanks
Dave
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists