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  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, 15 Dec 2020 11:14:20 +0000
From:   Pavel Begunkov <>
To:     Ming Lei <>
Cc:, Jens Axboe <>,
        Christoph Hellwig <>,
        Matthew Wilcox <>,
        Johannes Weiner <>,
        Alexander Viro <>,
        "Darrick J . Wong" <>,
        "Martin K . Petersen" <>,
        Jonathan Corbet <>,,,,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/6] no-copy bvec

On 15/12/2020 01:41, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 12:20:19AM +0000, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> Instead of creating a full copy of iter->bvec into bio in direct I/O,
>> the patchset makes use of the one provided. It changes semantics and
>> obliges users of asynchronous kiocb to track bvec lifetime, and [1/6]
>> converts the only place that doesn't.
> Just think of one corner case: iov_iter(BVEC) may pass bvec table with zero
> length bvec, which may not be supported by block layer or driver, so
> this patchset has to address this case first.

The easiest for me would be to fallback to copy if there are zero bvecs,
e.g. finding such during iov_iter_alignment(), but do we know from where
zero bvecs can came? As it's internals we may want to forbid them if
there is not too much hassle.

> Please see 7e24969022cb ("block: allow for_each_bvec to support zero len bvec").

Pavel Begunkov

Powered by blists - more mailing lists