linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] iopmem : A block device for PCIe memory

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: <20161021095714.GA12209@infradead.org>
Date:   Fri, 21 Oct 2016 02:57:14 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:     Stephen Bates <sbates@...thlin.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org>,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>,
        jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com, haggaie@...lanox.com,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        jim.macdonald@...rspin.com, sbates@...thin.com,
        Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] iopmem : A block device for PCIe memory

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:22:39AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> You do realise that local filesystems can silently change the
> location of file data at any point in time, so there is no such
> thing as a "stable mapping" of file data to block device addresses
> in userspace?
> 
> If you want remote access to the blocks owned and controlled by a
> filesystem, then you need to use a filesystem with a remote locking
> mechanism to allow co-ordinated, coherent access to the data in
> those blocks. Anything else is just asking for ongoing, unfixable
> filesystem corruption or data leakage problems (i.e.  security
> issues).

And at least for XFS we have such a mechanism :)  E.g. I have a
prototype of a pNFS layout that uses XFS+DAX to allow clients to do
RDMA directly to XFS files, with the same locking mechanism we use
for the current block and scsi layout in xfs_pnfs.c.