linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] brd: Refuse improperly aligned discard requests

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: <20151105080642.GD20212@quack.suse.cz>
Date:	Thu, 5 Nov 2015 09:06:42 +0100
From:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:	"Elliott, Robert (Persistent Memory)" <elliott@....com>
Cc:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>, "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] brd: Refuse improperly aligned discard requests

On Thu 05-11-15 04:18:49, Elliott, Robert (Persistent Memory) wrote:
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: linux-kernel-owner@...r.kernel.org [mailto:linux-kernel-
> > owner@...r.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Jan Kara
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 4, 2015 10:14 AM
> > To: axboe@...nel.dk
> > Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>; linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org;
> > Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>; Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
> > Subject: [PATCH] brd: Refuse improperly aligned discard requests
> > 
> > Currently when improperly aligned discard request is submitted, we just
> > silently discard more / less data which results in filesystem corruption
> > in some cases. Refuse such misaligned requests.
> 
> I agree discarding more than requested is very bad.
> 
> If they are routed to SCSI or ATA devices, though, the discard commands
> (SCSI UNMAP or ATA DATA SET MANAGEMENT/TRIM) are just hints, so there 
> is no guarantee the discard will do anything.  Are you finding 
> filesystems that still don't understand that?   dm-raid held that
> mistaken assumption for a long time.

So there is blkdev_issue_zeroout() which uses blkdev_issue_discard() if
'discard_zeroes_data' is set. I'd hope that in that case zeroing really
happens as submitted or error is returned... Filesystems definitely depend
on blkdev_issue_zeroout() doing what it is told.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
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/