linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] block: loose check on sg gap

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: <MWHPR03MB26696887EF248C5D2FC260D2BF660@MWHPR03MB2669.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Wed, 11 Jan 2017 05:10:46 +0000
From:   Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
CC:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        "Vitaly Kuznetsov" <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>,
        "Hannes Reinecke" <hare@...e.de>,
        Mike Christie <mchristi@...hat.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@....com>,
        "Dan Williams" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...t.com>,
        KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] block: loose check on sg gap

> From: Dexuan Cui
> Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2016 11:41
> To: 'Jens Axboe' <axboe@...com>; Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
> Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>; linux-block
> <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>; Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>;
> Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>; Keith Busch
> <keith.busch@...el.com>; Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>; Mike Christie
> <mchristi@...hat.com>; Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@...cle.com>;
> Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@....com>; Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>;
> Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...t.com>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] block: loose check on sg gap
> 
> > From: Jens Axboe [mailto:axboe@...com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2016 10:31
> > To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
> > Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>; linux-block
> <linux-
> > block@...r.kernel.org>; Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>; Dexuan
> Cui
> > <decui@...rosoft.com>; Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>; Keith
> Busch
> > <keith.busch@...el.com>; Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>; Mike Christie
> > <mchristi@...hat.com>; Martin K. Petersen
> <martin.petersen@...cle.com>;
> > Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@....com>; Dan Williams
> <dan.j.williams@...el.com>;
> > Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...t.com>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: loose check on sg gap
> >
> > On 12/19/2016 07:07 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 12:49 AM, Jens Axboe <axboe@...com> wrote:
> > >> On 12/17/2016 03:49 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > >>> If the last bvec of the 1st bio and the 1st bvec of the next
> > >>> bio are contineous physically, and the latter can be merged
> > >>> to last segment of the 1st bio, we should think they don't
> > >>> violate sg gap(or virt boundary) limit.
> > >>>
> > >>> Both Vitaly and Dexuan reported lots of unmergeable small bios
> > >>> are observed when running mkfs on Hyper-V virtual storage, and
> > >>> performance becomes quite low, so this patch is figured out for
> > >>> fixing the performance issue.
> > >>>
> > >>> The same issue should exist on NVMe too sine it sets virt boundary
> too.
> > >>
> > >> It looks pretty reasonable to me. I'll queue it up for some testing,
> > >> changes like this always make me a little nervous.
> > >
> > > Understood.
> > >
> > > But given it is still in early stage of 4.10 cycle, seems fine to expose
> > > it now, and we should have enough time to fix it if there might be
> > > regressions.
> > >
> > > BTW, it passes my xfstest(ext4) over sata/NVMe.
> >
> > It's been fine here in testing, too. I'm not worried about performance
> > regressions, those we can always fix. Merging makes me worried about
> > corruption, and those regressions are much worse.
> >
> > Any reason we need to rush this? I'd be more comfortable pushing this to
> > 4.11, unless there are strong reasons this should make 4.10.
> >
> > --
> > Jens Axboe
> 
> Hi Jens,
> 
> As far as I know, the patch is important to popular Linux distros,
> e.g. at least Ubuntu 14.04.5, 16.x and RHEL 7.3, when they run on
> Hyper-V/Azure, because they can suffer from a pretty bad
> throughput/latency
> in some cases, e.g. mkfs.ext4 for a 100GB partition can take 8 minutes, but
> with the patch, it only takes 1 second.
> 
> -- Dexuan

Hi Ming, Jens,
Did you find any issue later when testing with the patch?

May I know if it's possible to have it in 4.10 considering the above impact?

Is it on some temporary branch of linux-block.git? Looks not.

Thanks,
-- Dexuan