linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 4/4] dm: add DM_INTERPOSED

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20210310123456.GA758100@infradead.org>
Date:   Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:34:56 +0000
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Sergei Shtepa <sergei.shtepa@...am.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        "snitzer@...hat.com" <snitzer@...hat.com>,
        "agk@...hat.com" <agk@...hat.com>, "hare@...e.de" <hare@...e.de>,
        "song@...nel.org" <song@...nel.org>,
        "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        "dm-devel@...hat.com" <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
        "linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-raid@...r.kernel.org" <linux-raid@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-api@...r.kernel.org" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        Pavel Tide <Pavel.TIde@...am.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/4] dm: add DM_INTERPOSED_FLAG

On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 08:28:12AM +0300, Sergei Shtepa wrote:
> > So instead of doing this shoudn't the interposer just always submit to the
> > whole device?  But if we keep it, the logic in this funtion should go
> > into a block layer helper, passing a block device instead of the

> 
> device-mapper allows to create devices of any size using only part of
> the underlying device. Therefore, it is not possible to apply the
> interposer to the whole block device.
> Perhaps it makes sense to put the blk_partition_unremap() function in the
> block layer? I'm not sure that's a good thing.

I suspect the answer is to not remap bios that are going to be handled
by the interposer.  In fact much of submit_bio_checks as-is is a bad
idea for interposed devices.  I think what we need to do instead is to
pass an explicit bdev to submit_bio_checks and use that everywhere,
including in the subfunctions.

With that we might also be able to remove the separate interpose hook
and thus struct bdev_interposer entirely as now ->submit_bio of the
interposer could do all the work:

static noinline blk_qc_t submit_bio_interposed(struct bio *bio)
{
	struct block_device *orig_bdev = bio->bi_bdev, *interposer;
	struct bio_list bio_list[2] = { };
	blk_qc_t ret = BLK_QC_T_NONE;

	if (current->bio_list) {
                bio_list_add(&current->bio_list[0], bio);
                return BLK_QC_T_NONE;
        }

	if (unlikely(bio_queue_enter(bio)))
		return BLK_QC_T_NONE;

	interposer = orig_bdev->bd_interposer;
	if (unlikely(!interposer)) {
		/* interposer was removed */
		bio_list_add(&current->bio_list[0], bio);
		goto queue_exit;
	}
	if (!submit_bio_checks(bio, interposer))
		goto queue_exit;

	bio_set_flag(bio, BIO_INTERPOSED);

	current->bio_list = bio_list;
	ret = interposer->bd_disk->fops->submit_bio(bio);
	current->bio_list = NULL;

queue_exit:
	blk_queue_exit(bdev->bd_disk->queue);

	/* Resubmit remaining bios */
	while ((bio = bio_list_pop(&bio_list[0])))
		ret = submit_bio_noacct(bio);
	return ret;
}

blk_qc_t submit_bio_noacct(struct bio *bio)
{
	if (bio->bi_bdev->bd_interposer && !bio_flagged(bio, BIO_INTERPOSED)
		return submit_bio_interposed(bio);
		
	...
}

Note that both with this and your original code the interposer must
never resubmit I/O to itself.  Is that actually the case for DM?  I'm
trying to think of a good debug check for that, but right now I can't
think of something that doesn't cause any overhead for n