linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] bcache: avoid oversized read request in cache missing code path

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: <6d08d23b-b778-4e5f-a5f3-7106a42e26a1@suse.de>
Date:   Mon, 7 Jun 2021 19:55:22 +0800
From:   Coly Li <colyli@...e.de>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     axboe@...nel.dk, linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Alexander Ullrich <ealex1979@...il.com>,
        Diego Ercolani <diego.ercolani@...il.com>,
        Jan Szubiak <jan.szubiak@...uxpolska.pl>,
        Marco Rebhan <me@...saiko.net>,
        Matthias Ferdinand <bcache@...dv.net>,
        Victor Westerhuis <victor@...terhu.is>,
        Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.cz>,
        Rolf Fokkens <rolf@...ffokkens.nl>,
        Thorsten Knabe <linux@...rsten-knabe.de>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>,
        Nix <nix@...eri.org.uk>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] bcache: avoid oversized read request in cache
 missing code path

On 6/7/21 7:06 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 06:35:39PM +0800, Coly Li wrote:
>> +	/* Limitation for valid replace key size and cache_bio bvecs number */
>> +	size_limit = min_t(unsigned int, bio_max_segs(UINT_MAX) * PAGE_SECTORS,
>> +			   (1 << KEY_SIZE_BITS) - 1);
> bio_max_segs kaps the argument to BIO_MAX_VECS, so you might as well

It was suggested to not directly access BIO_MAX_VECS by you, maybe I
misunderstood you.

> directly write BIO_MAX_VECS.  Can you explain the PAGE_SECTORS here a bit
> more? Does this code path use discontiguous per-sector allocations?
> Preferably in a comment.

It is just because bch_bio_map() assume the maximum bio size is 1MB. It
was not true since the multiple pages bvecs
was merged in mainline kernel.

The PAGE_SECTORS part is legacy for 1MB maximum size bio (256*4KB), it
should be fixed/improved later to
use multiple pages for bio size > 1MB and replace bch_bio_map().

>> +	s->insert_bio_sectors = min3(size_limit, sectors, bio_sectors(bio));
> Also I don't really understand the units involved here.
> s->insert_bio_sectors, sectors, and bio_sectors is in unit of 512 byte
> sectors.  

Yes, they are in sectors, this is the maximum permitted bio size for 1MB
bio size. Now we can have bio > 1MB, and you modify
bio_alloc_bioset() parameter 'nr_iovecs from unsigned int to unsigned
short, so bio-size/page-size can be > 256 and overflow,
e.g. 258 overflows to 2, then the BUG in biovec_slab() is triggered.

I feel this is a long time existing issue in bcache code, and should be
fixed from bcache side, and your change helps to trigger
the problem explicitly.

>> -	miss = bio_next_split(bio, sectors, GFP_NOIO, &s->d->bio_split);
>> +	miss = bio_next_split(bio, s->insert_bio_sectors, GFP_NOIO, &s->d->bio_split);
> Overly long line.

Not any more. Now the line limit is 100 characters. Though I still
prefer 80 characters, place 86 characters in single line
makes the change more obvious.

Thanks.

Coly Li