linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] block: create ioctl to discard-or-zeroout a range of blocks

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]

Date:	Thu, 3 Mar 2016 10:12:40 -0800
From:	"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	shane.seymour@....com, Bruce Fields <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] block: create ioctl to discard-or-zeroout a range of
 blocks

On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 10:09:24AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 01:01:11PM -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> > That's not entirely true. Writing the blocks may cause them to be
> > allocated on the storage device (depending on which flags we feed it in
> > WRITE SAME).
> > 
> > The filesystems people were wanted the following semantics:
> > 
> >  - deallocate, don't care about contents for future reads (discard)
> >  - deallocate, guarantee zeroes on future reads (zeroout)
> >  - (re)allocate, guarantee zeroes on future reads (zeroout)
> > 
> > Maybe we just need a better naming scheme...
> 
> In filesystem terms we have two and three:
> 
>  - FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE assures zeroes are returned, but space is
>    deallocated as much as possible
>  - FALLOC_FL_ZERO_RANGE assures zeroes are returned, AND blocks are
>    actually allocated
> 
> Returning stale blocks in a file system is a nasty security risk, so
> we don't do that, and so shouldn't storage that offers any kind
> of multi tenancy, and if it's just VMs using multiple partitions on it.

Any particular reason why we can't just implement those two fallocate
flags for block devices?

--D