linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 0/8] block: prepare for multipage bvecs

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: <20160601135150.GA30759@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 1 Jun 2016 09:51:51 -0400
From:	Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-block@...r.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	"open list:DRBD DRIVER" <drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com>,
	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Joe Thornber <ejt@...hat.com>,
	Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>,
	Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>,
	Sagi Grimberg <sagig@...lanox.com>, Shaohua Li <shli@...com>,
	Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	"open list:XFS FILESYSTEM" <xfs@....sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/8] block: prepare for multipage bvecs

On Wed, Jun 01 2016 at  9:44am -0400,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 08:38:41PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > be dm-crypt.c.  Maybe you've identified some indirect use of
> > > BIO_MAX_SIZE?
> > 
> > I mean the recently introduced BIO_MAX_SIZE in -next tree:
> > 
> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/drivers/md/dm-crypt.c?id=4ed89c97b0706477b822ea2182827640c0cec486
> 
> The crazy bcache bios striking back once again.  I really think it's
> harmful having a _MAX value and then having a minor driver
> reinterpreting it and sending larger ones.  Until we can lift the
> maximum limit in general nad have common code exercise it we really need
> to stop bcache from sending these instead of littering the tree with
> workarounds.

So should I not push this type of fix to Linus now?  I was going to send
the above commit and this one to him this week:
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/device-mapper/linux-dm.git/commit/?h=dm-4.7&id=57b3001b240629ecc5266d28c845e23ca5f11719

Instead, should bcache be made to not do what it is doing?