linux-kernel - [PATCH 2/3] block: require write_same and discard requests align to logical block size

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160315194236.30093.87681.stgit@birch.djwong.org>
Date:	Tue, 15 Mar 2016 12:42:36 -0700
From:	"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>
To:	axboe@...nel.dk, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	darrick.wong@...cle.com
Cc:	bfields@...ldses.org, tytso@....edu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	martin.petersen@...cle.com, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
	david@...morbit.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	shane.seymour@....com, hch@...radead.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, jlayton@...chiereds.net,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] block: require write_same and discard requests align to
 logical block size

Make sure that the offset and length arguments that we're using to
construct WRITE SAME and DISCARD requests are actually aligned to the
logical block size.  Failure to do this causes other errors in other
parts of the block layer or the SCSI layer because disks don't support
partial logical block writes.

Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@...cle.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
---
 block/blk-lib.c |   15 +++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)


diff --git a/block/blk-lib.c b/block/blk-lib.c
index 9ebf653..9dca6bb 100644
--- a/block/blk-lib.c
+++ b/block/blk-lib.c
@@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ int blkdev_issue_discard(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t sector,
 	struct bio *bio;
 	int ret = 0;
 	struct blk_plug plug;
+	sector_t bs_mask;
 
 	if (!q)
 		return -ENXIO;
@@ -56,6 +57,10 @@ int blkdev_issue_discard(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t sector,
 	if (!blk_queue_discard(q))
 		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
 
+	bs_mask = (bdev_logical_block_size(bdev) >> 9) - 1;
+	if ((sector | nr_sects) & bs_mask)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
 	/* Zero-sector (unknown) and one-sector granularities are the same.  */
 	granularity = max(q->limits.discard_granularity >> 9, 1U);
 	alignment = (bdev_discard_alignment(bdev) >> 9) % granularity;
@@ -148,6 +153,7 @@ int blkdev_issue_write_same(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t sector,
 	DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK(wait);
 	struct request_queue *q = bdev_get_queue(bdev);
 	unsigned int max_write_same_sectors;
+	sector_t bs_mask;
 	struct bio_batch bb;
 	struct bio *bio;
 	int ret = 0;
@@ -155,6 +161,10 @@ int blkdev_issue_write_same(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t sector,
 	if (!q)
 		return -ENXIO;
 
+	bs_mask = (bdev_logical_block_size(bdev) >> 9) - 1;
+	if ((sector | nr_sects) & bs_mask)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
 	/* Ensure that max_write_same_sectors doesn't overflow bi_size */
 	max_write_same_sectors = UINT_MAX >> 9;
 
@@ -218,9 +228,14 @@ static int __blkdev_issue_zeroout(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t sector,
 	int ret;
 	struct bio *bio;
 	struct bio_batch bb;
+	sector_t bs_mask;
 	unsigned int sz;
 	DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK(wait);
 
+	bs_mask = (bdev_logical_block_size(bdev) >> 9) - 1;
+	if ((sector | nr_sects) & bs_mask)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
 	atomic_set(&bb.done, 1);
 	bb.error = 0;
 	bb.wait = &wait;