linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 03/10] fs: Introduce ->corrupted

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: <CAPcyv4h=bUCgFudKTrW09dzi8MWxg7cBC9m68zX1=HY24ftR-A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 15 Jun 2021 17:48:49 -0700
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@...itsu.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-xfs <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        device-mapper development <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        david <david@...morbit.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
        Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
        Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@...e.de>,
        Linux NVDIMM <nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 03/10] fs: Introduce ->corrupted_range() for superblock

[ drop old linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org, add nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev ]

On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 6:19 PM Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@...itsu.com> wrote:
>
> Memory failure occurs in fsdax mode will finally be handled in
> filesystem.  We introduce this interface to find out files or metadata
> affected by the corrupted range, and try to recover the corrupted data
> if possiable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@...itsu.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/fs.h | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
> index c3c88fdb9b2a..92af36c4225f 100644
> --- a/include/linux/fs.h
> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> @@ -2176,6 +2176,8 @@ struct super_operations {
>                                   struct shrink_control *);
>         long (*free_cached_objects)(struct super_block *,
>                                     struct shrink_control *);
> +       int (*corrupted_range)(struct super_block *sb, struct block_device *bdev,
> +                              loff_t offset, size_t len, void *data);

Why does the superblock need a new operation? Wouldn't whatever
function is specified here just be specified to the dax_dev as the
->notify_failure() holder callback?