linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] fs: optimise generic_write_check

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]

Date:   Sun, 8 Aug 2021 14:41:13 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Matthew Wilcox' <willy@...radead.org>,
        Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
CC:     Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] fs: optimise generic_write_check_limits()

From: Matthew Wilcox
> Sent: 06 August 2021 14:28
> 
> On Fri, Aug 06, 2021 at 12:22:10PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> > Even though ->s_maxbytes is used by generic_write_check_limits() only in
> > case of O_LARGEFILE, the value is loaded unconditionally, which is heavy
> > and takes 4 indirect loads. Optimise it by not touching ->s_maxbytes,
> > if it's not going to be used.
> 
> Is this "optimisation" actually worth anything?  Look at how
> force_o_largefile() is used.  I would suggest that on the vast majority
> of machines, O_LARGEFILE is always set.

An option would be to only determine ->s_maxbytes when the size
if larger than MAX_NON_LFS.

So you'd end up with something like:

	if (pos >= max_size) {
		if (!(file->f_flags & O_LARGEFILE))
			return -EFBIG;
		inode = file->f_mapping->host;
		if (pos >= inode->i_sb->s_maxbytes)
			return -EFBIG;
	}

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)