linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] block: don't make BLK_DEF_MAX

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: <20160330022651.GA2147487@devbig084.prn1.facebook.com>
Date:	Tue, 29 Mar 2016 19:27:00 -0700
From:	Shaohua Li <shli@...com>
To:	Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
CC:	<linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>, FB Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>,
	"4.2+" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: don't make BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS too big

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 09:39:35AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Shaohua Li <shli@...com> wrote:
> > bio_alloc_bioset() allocates bvecs from bvec_slabs which can only
> > allocate maximum 256 bvec (eg, 1M for 4k pages). We can't bump
> > BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS to exceed this value otherwise bio_alloc_bioset will
> > fail.
> >
> > In the future, we can extend the size either bvec_slabs array is
> > expanded or the upcoming multipage bvec is added if pages are
> > contiguous. This one is suitable for stable.
> >
> > Fixes: d2be537c3ba (block: bump BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS to 2560)
> > Reported-by: Sebastian Roesner <sroesner-kernelorg@...sner-online.de>
> > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org (4.2+)
> > Cc: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shli@...com>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/blkdev.h | 6 +++++-
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> > index 7e5d7e0..da64325 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> > @@ -1153,7 +1153,11 @@ extern int blk_verify_command(unsigned char *cmd, fmode_t has_write_perm);
> >  enum blk_default_limits {
> >         BLK_MAX_SEGMENTS        = 128,
> >         BLK_SAFE_MAX_SECTORS    = 255,
> > -       BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS     = 2560,
> > +       /*
> > +        * if you change this, please also change bvec_alloc and BIO_MAX_PAGES.
> > +        * Otherwise bio_alloc_bioset will break.
> > +        */
> > +       BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS     = BIO_MAX_SECTORS,
> 
> Thinking about it further, it isn't good to change the default max
> sectors because
> the patch affects REQ_PC bios too, which don't have the 1Mbytes limit at all.

what breaks setting REQ_PC to 1M limit? I can understand bigger limit might help
big raid array performance, but REQ_PC isn't the case.

> So suggest to just change bcache's queue max sector limit to 1M, that means
> we shouldn't encourage bcache's usage of bypassing bio_add_page().

Don't think this is a good idea. This is a limitation of block core,
block core should make sure the limitation doesn't break, not the
driver. On the other hand, are you going to fix all drivers? drivers can
set arbitrary max sector limit.

Thanks,
Shaohua