linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drbd: fix discard_zeroes_if

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.11.1906012121470.27699@mx.ewheeler.net>
Date:   Sun, 2 Jun 2019 00:28:31 +0000 (UTC)
From:   Eric Wheeler <drbd-dev@...ts.ewheeler.net>
To:     Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenberg@...bit.com>
cc:     drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drbd: fix discard_zeroes_if_aligned regression

On Tue, 28 May 2019, Lars Ellenberg wrote:

> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 05:36:32PM +0000, Eric Wheeler wrote:
> > Hi Lars,
> > 
> > We just tried 4.19.x and this bugs still exists. We applied the patch 
> > which was originally submitted to this thread and it still applies cleanly 
> > and seems to work for our use case. You mentioned that you had some older 
> > code which zeroed out unaligned discard requests (or perhaps it was for a 
> > different purpose) that you may be able to use to patch this. Could you 
> > dig those up and see if we can get this solved?
> > 
> > It would be nice to be able to use drbd with thin backing volumes from the 
> > vanilla kernel. If this has already been fixed in something newer than 
> > 4.19, then please point me to the commit.
> 
> I think it was merged upstream in 5.0
> f31e583aa2c2 drbd: introduce P_ZEROES (REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES on the "wire")

Thanks Lars, I appreciate your patch.  

Your unaligned zerout code in drbd_issue_discard_or_zero_out() looks 
great.  I particulary like how you adjusted max_discard_sectors to the 
granularity, as well as alignment handling.  Well thought out.

Your commit notes that "for backward compatibility, P_TRIM means zero-out, 
unless the DRBD_FF_WZEROES feature flag is agreed upon during handshake."

We test our environment by deploying the newer kernel on one of the DRBD 
servers and checking for regressions---but this will cause a zero-out on 
the new server because the old server doesn't yet support DRBD_FF_WZEROES.

For our purpose, can you think of any reason that it would be unsafe to 
hack the following into drbd_do_features() so the newer version will not 
zero-out while we test and get both nodes up to the newer version?

diff --git a/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_receiver.c b/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_receiver.c
index c7ad88d..76191e6 100644
--- a/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_receiver.c
+++ b/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_receiver.c
@@ -5382,6 +5382,8 @@ static int drbd_do_features(struct drbd_connection *connection)
 	connection->agreed_pro_version = min_t(int, PRO_VERSION_MAX, p->protocol_max);
 	connection->agreed_features = PRO_FEATURES & be32_to_cpu(p->feature_flags);
 
+	connection->agreed_features |= DRBD_FF_WZEROES;
+
 	drbd_info(connection, "Handshake successful: "
 	     "Agreed network protocol version %d\n", connection->agreed_pro_version);


--
Eric Wheeler



> 
> -- 
> : Lars Ellenberg
> : LINBIT | Keeping the Digital World Running
> : DRBD -- Heartbeat -- Corosync -- Pacemaker
> : R&D, Integration, Ops, Consulting, Support
> 
> DRBD® and LINBIT® are registered trademarks of LINBIT
>