| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2022 17:14:30 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, axboe@...nel.dk, hch@....de,
martin.petersen@...cle.com, colyli@...e.de,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 08/10] block: add pi for nvme enhanced integrity
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 08:31:42AM -0800, Keith Busch wrote:
> +static __be64 nvme_pi_crc64(void *data, unsigned int len)
> +{
> + return cpu_to_be64(crc64_rocksoft(data, len));
> +}
> +
> +static blk_status_t nvme_crc64_generate(struct blk_integrity_iter *iter,
> + enum t10_dif_type type)
Shouldn't the naming be something more like ext_pi_*? For one thing
I kinda hate having the nvme prefix here in block layer code, but also
nvme supports the normal 8 byte PI tuples, so this is a bit confusing.
> +{
> + unsigned int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0 ; i < iter->data_size ; i += iter->interval) {
> + struct nvme_crc64_pi_tuple *pi = iter->prot_buf;
> +
> + pi->guard_tag = nvme_pi_crc64(iter->data_buf, iter->interval);
> + pi->app_tag = 0;
> +
> + if (type == T10_PI_TYPE1_PROTECTION)
> + put_unaligned_be48(iter->seed, pi->ref_tag);
> + else
> + put_unaligned_be48(0ULL, pi->ref_tag);
> +
> + iter->data_buf += iter->interval;
> + iter->prot_buf += iter->tuple_size;
> + iter->seed++;
> + }
> +
> + return BLK_STS_OK;
> +}
> +
> +static bool nvme_crc64_ref_escape(u8 *ref_tag)
> +{
> + static u8 ref_escape[6] = { 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff };
> +
> + return memcmp(ref_tag, ref_escape, sizeof(ref_escape)) == 0;
> +}
> +
> +static blk_status_t nvme_crc64_verify(struct blk_integrity_iter *iter,
> + enum t10_dif_type type)
> +{
> + unsigned int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < iter->data_size; i += iter->interval) {
> + struct nvme_crc64_pi_tuple *pi = iter->prot_buf;
> + u64 ref, seed;
> + __be64 csum;
> +
> + if (type == T10_PI_TYPE1_PROTECTION) {
> + if (pi->app_tag == T10_PI_APP_ESCAPE)
> + goto next;
> +
> + ref = get_unaligned_be48(pi->ref_tag);
> + seed = lower_48_bits(iter->seed);
> + if (ref != seed) {
> + pr_err("%s: ref tag error at location %llu (rcvd %llu)\n",
> + iter->disk_name, seed, ref);
> + return BLK_STS_PROTECTION;
> + }
> + } else if (type == T10_PI_TYPE3_PROTECTION) {
> + if (pi->app_tag == T10_PI_APP_ESCAPE &&
> + nvme_crc64_ref_escape(pi->ref_tag))
> + goto next;
> + }
> +
> + csum = nvme_pi_crc64(iter->data_buf, iter->interval);
> + if (pi->guard_tag != csum) {
> + pr_err("%s: guard tag error at sector %llu " \
> + "(rcvd %016llx, want %016llx)\n",
> + iter->disk_name, (unsigned long long)iter->seed,
> + be64_to_cpu(pi->guard_tag), be64_to_cpu(csum));
> + return BLK_STS_PROTECTION;
> + }
> +
> +next:
> + iter->data_buf += iter->interval;
> + iter->prot_buf += iter->tuple_size;
> + iter->seed++;
> + }
> +
> + return BLK_STS_OK;
> +}
> +
> +static blk_status_t nvme_pi_type1_verify_crc(struct blk_integrity_iter *iter)
> +{
> + return nvme_crc64_verify(iter, T10_PI_TYPE1_PROTECTION);
> +}
> +
> +static blk_status_t nvme_pi_type1_generate_crc(struct blk_integrity_iter *iter)
> +{
> + return nvme_crc64_generate(iter, T10_PI_TYPE1_PROTECTION);
> +}
> +
> +static void nvme_pi_type1_prepare(struct request *rq)
> +{
> + const int tuple_sz = rq->q->integrity.tuple_size;
> + u64 ref_tag = nvme_pi_extended_ref_tag(rq);
> + struct bio *bio;
> +
> + __rq_for_each_bio(bio, rq) {
> + struct bio_integrity_payload *bip = bio_integrity(bio);
> + u64 virt = lower_48_bits(bip_get_seed(bip));
> + struct bio_vec iv;
> + struct bvec_iter iter;
> +
> + /* Already remapped? */
> + if (bip->bip_flags & BIP_MAPPED_INTEGRITY)
> + break;
> +
> + bip_for_each_vec(iv, bip, iter) {
> + unsigned int j;
> + void *p;
> +
> + p = bvec_kmap_local(&iv);
> + for (j = 0; j < iv.bv_len; j += tuple_sz) {
> + struct nvme_crc64_pi_tuple *pi = p;
> + u64 ref = get_unaligned_be48(pi->ref_tag);
> +
> + if (ref == virt)
> + put_unaligned_be48(ref_tag, pi->ref_tag);
> + virt++;
> + ref_tag++;
> + p += tuple_sz;
> + }
> + kunmap_local(p);
> + }
> +
> + bip->bip_flags |= BIP_MAPPED_INTEGRITY;
> + }
> +}
> +
> +static void nvme_pi_type1_complete(struct request *rq, unsigned int nr_bytes)
> +{
> + unsigned intervals = nr_bytes >> rq->q->integrity.interval_exp;
> + const int tuple_sz = rq->q->integrity.tuple_size;
> + u64 ref_tag = nvme_pi_extended_ref_tag(rq);
> + struct bio *bio;
> +
> + __rq_for_each_bio(bio, rq) {
> + struct bio_integrity_payload *bip = bio_integrity(bio);
> + u64 virt = lower_48_bits(bip_get_seed(bip));
> + struct bio_vec iv;
> + struct bvec_iter iter;
> +
> + bip_for_each_vec(iv, bip, iter) {
> + unsigned int j;
> + void *p;
> +
> + p = bvec_kmap_local(&iv);
> + for (j = 0; j < iv.bv_len && intervals; j += tuple_sz) {
> + struct nvme_crc64_pi_tuple *pi = p;
> + u64 ref = get_unaligned_be48(pi->ref_tag);
> +
> + if (ref == ref_tag)
> + put_unaligned_be48(virt, pi->ref_tag);
> + virt++;
> + ref_tag++;
> + intervals--;
> + p += tuple_sz;
> + }
> + kunmap_local(p);
> + }
> + }
> +}
> +
> +static blk_status_t nvme_pi_type3_verify_crc(struct blk_integrity_iter *iter)
> +{
> + return nvme_crc64_verify(iter, T10_PI_TYPE3_PROTECTION);
> +}
> +
> +static blk_status_t nvme_pi_type3_generate_crc(struct blk_integrity_iter *iter)
> +{
> + return nvme_crc64_generate(iter, T10_PI_TYPE3_PROTECTION);
> +}
> +
> +const struct blk_integrity_profile nvme_pi_type1_crc64 = {
> + .name = "NVME-DIF-TYPE1-CRC64",
> + .generate_fn = nvme_pi_type1_generate_crc,
> + .verify_fn = nvme_pi_type1_verify_crc,
> + .prepare_fn = nvme_pi_type1_prepare,
> + .complete_fn = nvme_pi_type1_complete,
> +};
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(nvme_pi_type1_crc64);
All this should probably be EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL (and I have a series
pending that would remove the exports of the profiles entirely,
but that will need some major rework after your series goes in).
The actual code looks fine to me.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists