linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] loop: Add LOOP_SET_FD_WITH

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: <20200330010024.GA23640@ming.t460p>
Date:   Mon, 30 Mar 2020 09:00:24 +0800
From:   Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
To:     Martijn Coenen <maco@...roid.com>
Cc:     axboe@...nel.dk, hch@....de, bvanassche@....org,
        Chaitanya.Kulkarni@....com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] loop: Add LOOP_SET_FD_WITH_OFFSET ioctl.

On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 04:04:59PM +0200, Martijn Coenen wrote:
> Configuring a loop device for a filesystem that is located at an offset
> currently requires calling LOOP_SET_FD and LOOP_SET_STATUS(64)
> consecutively. This has some downsides.
> 
> The most important downside is that it can be slow. Here's setting
> up ~70 regular loop devices on an x86 Android device:
> 
> vsoc_x86:/system/apex # time for i in `seq 30 100`;
> do losetup -r /dev/block/loop$i com.android.adbd.apex; done
>     0m01.85s real     0m00.01s user     0m00.01s system
> 
> Here's configuring ~70 devices in the same way, but with an offset:
> 
> vsoc_x86:/system/apex # time for i in `seq 30 100`;
> do losetup -r -o 4096 /dev/block/loop$i com.android.adbd.apex; done
>     0m03.40s real     0m00.02s user     0m00.03s system
> 
> This is almost twice as slow; the main reason for this slowness is that
> LOOP_SET_STATUS(64) calls blk_mq_freeze_queue() to freeze the associated
> queue; this requires waiting for RCU synchronization, which I've
> measured can take about 15-20ms on this device on average.
> 
> A more minor downside of having to do two ioctls is that on devices with
> max_part > 0, the kernel will initiate a partition scan, which is
> needless work if the image is at an offset.
> 
> This change introduces a new ioctl to combine setting the backing file
> together with the offset, which avoids the above problems. Adding more
> parameters could be a consideration, but offset appears to be the only
> commonly used parameter that is required for accessing the device
> safely.

The new ioctl LOOP_SET_FD_WITH_OFFSET looks not generic enough, could
you consider to add one ioctl LOOP_SET_FD_AND_STATUS to cover both
SET_FD and SET_STATUS so that using two ioctl() to setup loop can become
deprecated finally?


Thanks,
Ming