linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/6] Support DAX for device-mapper dm-linear devices

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:	Tue, 21 Jun 2016 16:35:56 +0000
From:	"Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@....com>
To:	"dan.j.williams@...el.com" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"sandeen@...hat.com" <sandeen@...hat.com>,
	"linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org>,
	"agk@...hat.com" <agk@...hat.com>,
	"linux-raid@...r.kernel.org" <linux-raid@...r.kernel.org>,
	"snitzer@...hat.com" <snitzer@...hat.com>,
	"viro@...iv.linux.org.uk" <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	"axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>, "axboe@...com" <axboe@...com>,
	"ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com" <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
	"dm-devel@...hat.com" <dm-devel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Support DAX for device-mapper dm-linear devices

On Tue, 2016-06-21 at 09:25 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 8:44 AM, Kani, Toshimitsu <toshi.kani@....com>
> wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 2016-06-21 at 09:41 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Jun 20 2016 at  6:22pm -0400,
> > > Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Mon, Jun 20 2016 at  5:28pm -0400,
> > > > Kani, Toshimitsu <toshi.kani@....com> wrote:
> >  :
> > > > Looks good, I folded it in and tested it to work.  Pushed to my 'wip'
> > > > branch.
> > > > 
> > > > No longer seeing any corruption in my test that was using partitions
> > > > to span pmem devices with a dm-linear device.
> > > > 
> > > > Jens, any chance you'd be open to picking up the first 2 patches in
> > > > this series?  Or would you like to see them folded or something
> > > > different?
> > >
> > > I'm now wondering if we'd be better off setting a new QUEUE_FLAG_DAX
> > > rather than establish GENHD_FL_DAX on the genhd?
> > > 
> > > It'd be quite a bit easier to allow upper layers (e.g. XFS and ext4) to
> > > check for a queue flag.
> >
> > I think GENHD_FL_DAX is more appropriate since DAX does not use a request
> > queue, except for protecting the underlining device being disabled while
> > direct_access() is called (b2e0d1625e19).
> > 
> > About protecting direct_access, this patch assumes that the underlining
> > device cannot be disabled until dtr() is called.  Is this correct?  If
> > not, I will need to call dax_map_atomic().
>
> Kernel internal usages of dax should be using dax_map_atomic() to
> safely resolve device removal races.

Will do.  In such case, shall I move dax_[un]map_atomic() to block_dev.c and
rename them to bdev_dax_[un]map_atomic()?

Thanks,
-Toshi