[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160203003416.GD3260@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 19:34:16 -0500
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jared Hulbert <jaredeh@...il.com>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] dax: fix bdev NULL pointer dereferences
On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 01:46:06PM -0800, Jared Hulbert wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:
> >> The filesystem I'm concerned with is AXFS
> >> (https://www.kernel.org/doc/ols/2008/ols2008v1-pages-211-218.pdf).
> >> Which I've been planning on trying to merge again due to a recent
> >> resurgence of interest. The device model for AXFS is... weird. It
> >> can use one or two devices at a time of any mix of NOR MTD, NAND MTD,
> >> block, and unmanaged physical memory. It's a terribly useful model
> >> for embedded. Anyway AXFS is readonly so hacking in a read only
> >> dax_fault_nodev() and dax_file_read() would work fine, looks easy
> >> enough. But... it would be cool if similar small embedded focused RW
> >> filesystems were enabled.
> >
> > Are those also out of tree?
>
> Of course. Merging embedded filesystems is little merging regular
> filesystems except 98% of you reviewers don't want it merged.
You should at least be able to get it into staging these days. I mean,
look at some of the junk that's in staging ... and I don't think AXFS was
nearly as bad.
> IMO you're making DAX more complex by overly coupling to the bdev and
> I think it could bite you later. I submit this rework of the radix
> tree and confusion about where to get the real bdev as evidence. I'm
> guessing that it won't be the last time. It's unnecessary to couple
> it like this, and in fact is not how the vfs has been layered in the
> past.
Huh? The rework to use the radix tree for PFNs was done with one eye
firmly on your usage case. Just because I had to thread the get_block
interface through it for the moment doesn't mean that I didn't have
the "how do we get rid of get_block entirely" question on my mind.
Using get_block seemed like the right idea three years ago. I didn't
know just how fundamentally ext4 and XFS disagree on how it should be
used.
> To look at the the downside consider dax_fault(). Its called on a
> fault to a user memory map, uses the filesystems get_block() to lookup
> a sector so you can ask a block device to convert it to an address on
> a DIMM. Come on, that's awkward. Everything around dax_fault() is
> dripping with memory semantic interfaces, the dax_fault() call are
> fundamentally about memory, the pmem calls are memory, the hardware is
> memory, and yet it directly calls bdev_direct_access(). It's out of
> place.
What was out of place was the old 'get_xip_mem' in address_space
operations. Returning a kernel virtual address and a PFN from a
filesystem operation? That looks awful. All the other operations deal
in struct pages, file offsets and occasionally sectors. Of course, we
don't have a struct page, so a pfn makes sense, but the kernel virtual
address being returned was a gargantuan layering problem.
> The legacy vfs/mm code didn't have this layering problem either. Even
> filemap_fault() that dax_fault() is modeled after doesn't call any
> bdev methods directly, when it needs something it asks the filesystem
> with a ->readpage(). The precedence is that you ask the filesystem
> for what you need. Look at the get_bdev() thing you've concluded you
> need. It _almost_ makes my point. I just happen to be of the opinion
> that you don't actually want or need the bdev, you want the pfn/kaddr
> so you can flush or map or memcpy().
You want the pfn. The device driver doesn't have enough information to
give you a (coherent with userspace) kaddr. That's what (some future
arch-specific implementation of) dax_map_pfn() is for. That's why it
takes 'index' as a parameter, so you can calculate where it'll be mapped
in userspace, and determine an appropriate kernel virtual address to
use for it.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists