| 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: <20140310020122.GD14370@bbox>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 11:01:22 +0900
From: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>,
Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] zram: propagate error to user
Hello Sergey,
On Sun, Mar 09, 2014 at 07:58:51PM +0300, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> Hello Minchan,
>
> On (03/07/14 18:51), Minchan Kim wrote:
> > Hello Sergey!
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 12:20:45PM +0300, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > > On (03/07/14 10:56), Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > When we initialized zcomp with single, we couldn't change
> > > > max_comp_streams without zram reset but current interface doesn't
> > > > show any error to user and even it changes max_comp_streams's value
> > > > without any effect so it would make user very confusing.
> > > >
> > > > This patch prevents max_comp_streams's change when zcomp was
> > > > initialized as single zcomp and emit the error to user(ex, echo).
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
> > > > ---
> > > > Documentation/blockdev/zram.txt | 9 +++++----
> > > > drivers/block/zram/zcomp.c | 10 +++++-----
> > > > drivers/block/zram/zcomp.h | 4 ++--
> > > > drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c | 15 +++++++++++----
> > > > 4 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/blockdev/zram.txt b/Documentation/blockdev/zram.txt
> > > > index 2604ffed51db..0595c3f56ccf 100644
> > > > --- a/Documentation/blockdev/zram.txt
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/blockdev/zram.txt
> > > > @@ -37,10 +37,11 @@ Note:
> > > > In order to enable compression backend's multi stream support max_comp_streams
> > > > must be initially set to desired concurrency level before ZRAM device
> > > > initialisation. Once the device initialised as a single stream compression
> > > > -backend (max_comp_streams equals to 0) changing the value of max_comp_streams
> > > > -will not take any effect, because single stream compression backend implemented
> > > > -as a special case and does not support dynamic max_comp_streams. Only multi
> > > > -stream backend supports dynamic max_comp_streams adjustment.
> > > > +backend (max_comp_streams equals to 1), you will see error if you try to change
> > > > +the value of max_comp_streams because single stream compression backend
> > > > +implemented as a special case by lock overhead issue and does not support
> > > > +dynamic max_comp_streams. Only multi stream backend supports dynamic
> > > > +max_comp_streams adjustment.
> > > >
> > > > 3) Select compression algorithm
> > > > Using comp_algorithm device attribute one can see available and
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/block/zram/zcomp.c b/drivers/block/zram/zcomp.c
> > > > index 92a83df40a27..15fe6a27781b 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/block/zram/zcomp.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/block/zram/zcomp.c
> > > > @@ -152,7 +152,7 @@ static void zcomp_strm_multi_release(struct zcomp *comp, struct zcomp_strm *zstr
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > /* change max_strm limit */
> > > > -static int zcomp_strm_multi_set_max_streams(struct zcomp *comp, int num_strm)
> > > > +static bool zcomp_strm_multi_set_max_streams(struct zcomp *comp, int num_strm)
> > > > {
> > > > struct zcomp_strm_multi *zs = comp->stream;
> > > > struct zcomp_strm *zstrm;
> > > > @@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ static int zcomp_strm_multi_set_max_streams(struct zcomp *comp, int num_strm)
> > > > zs->avail_strm--;
> > > > }
> > > > spin_unlock(&zs->strm_lock);
> > > > - return 0;
> > > > + return true;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > static void zcomp_strm_multi_destroy(struct zcomp *comp)
> > > > @@ -231,10 +231,10 @@ static void zcomp_strm_single_release(struct zcomp *comp,
> > > > mutex_unlock(&zs->strm_lock);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > -static int zcomp_strm_single_set_max_streams(struct zcomp *comp, int num_strm)
> > > > +static bool zcomp_strm_single_set_max_streams(struct zcomp *comp, int num_strm)
> > > > {
> > > > /* zcomp_strm_single support only max_comp_streams == 1 */
> > > > - return -ENOTSUPP;
> > > > + return 0;
> > > > }
> > >
> > > IMHO, -ENOTSUPP for unsupported operation fits better than `false'.
> > > yes, currently there are only two possible returns:
> > > 0 -- success
> > > -ENOTSUPP - not supported operation
> > >
> > > though, we can extend functions later and return additional codes, other
> > > than `false' and `true'.
> >
> > Thing to expose to user isn't true and false but EINVAL.
> >
>
> sure. I mean we can return actual zcomp_set_max_streams() error (if any)
> back to user from max_comp_streams_store():
>
> [..]
> ret = zcomp_set_max_streams(...);
> [..]
> return ret;
>
> > >
> > > for example, -E2BIG if user requested extremly large number of streams,
> > > like 5000 streams.
> >
> > I'm not sure it's right example for E2BIG.
> > When I read the comment, it says "argument list too long".
> > Anyway, when I tried ENOTSUPP, echo doesn't show meaningful error to user
> > and I dont' know it's casual err number for userspace.
> > Pz, comment about that.
> >
>
> E2BIG (introduced by POSIX.1-2001) was a quick example and, probably, not
> the perfect one. In general, I'm not against this change and I can live
> with zcomp_set_max_streams() returning bool.
Then, could you give me Acked-by?
I am hungry with that. :)
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
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