linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] f2fs: add sysfs entry to avoid FUA

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:   Fri, 27 May 2022 18:42:36 -0700
From:   "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
To:     Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
Cc:     Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] f2fs: add sysfs entry to avoid FUA

On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 06:06:08PM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 05/27, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > [+Cc linux-block for FUA, and linux-xfs for iomap]
> > 
> > On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 01:59:55PM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > Some UFS storage gives slower performance on FUA than write+cache_flush.
> > > Let's give a way to manage it.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
> > 
> > Should the driver even be saying that it has FUA support in this case?  If the
> > driver didn't claim FUA support, that would also solve this problem.
> 
> I think there's still some benefit to use FUA such as small chunk writes
> for checkpoint.
> 
> > 
> > > ---
> > >  Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-fs-f2fs | 7 +++++++
> > >  fs/f2fs/data.c                          | 2 ++
> > >  fs/f2fs/f2fs.h                          | 1 +
> > >  fs/f2fs/sysfs.c                         | 2 ++
> > >  4 files changed, 12 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-fs-f2fs b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-fs-f2fs
> > > index 9b583dd0298b..cd96b09d7182 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-fs-f2fs
> > > +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-fs-f2fs
> > > @@ -434,6 +434,7 @@ Date:		April 2020
> > >  Contact:	"Daeho Jeong" <daehojeong@...gle.com>
> > >  Description:	Give a way to change iostat_period time. 3secs by default.
> > >  		The new iostat trace gives stats gap given the period.
> > > +
> > >  What:		/sys/fs/f2fs/<disk>/max_io_bytes
> > >  Date:		December 2020
> > >  Contact:	"Jaegeuk Kim" <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
> > > @@ -442,6 +443,12 @@ Description:	This gives a control to limit the bio size in f2fs.
> > >  		whereas, if it has a certain bytes value, f2fs won't submit a
> > >  		bio larger than that size.
> > >  
> > > +What:		/sys/fs/f2fs/<disk>/no_fua_dio
> > > +Date:		May 2022
> > > +Contact:	"Jaegeuk Kim" <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
> > > +Description:	This gives a signal to iomap, which should not use FUA for
> > > +		direct IOs. Default: 0.
> > 
> > iomap is an implementation detail, so it shouldn't be mentioned in UAPI
> > documentation.  UAPI documentation should describe user-visible behavior only.
> 
> Ok.
> 
> > 
> > > +
> > >  What:		/sys/fs/f2fs/<disk>/stat/sb_status
> > >  Date:		December 2020
> > >  Contact:	"Chao Yu" <yuchao0@...wei.com>
> > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > > index f5f2b7233982..23486486eab2 100644
> > > --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > > @@ -4153,6 +4153,8 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset, loff_t length,
> > >  	if ((inode->i_state & I_DIRTY_DATASYNC) ||
> > >  	    offset + length > i_size_read(inode))
> > >  		iomap->flags |= IOMAP_F_DIRTY;
> > > +	if (F2FS_I_SB(inode)->no_fua_dio)
> > > +		iomap->flags |= IOMAP_F_DIRTY;
> > 
> > This is overloading the IOMAP_F_DIRTY flag to mean something other than dirty.
> > Perhaps this flag needs to be renamed, or a new flag should be added?
> 
> I'm not sure it's acceptable to add another flag for f2fs only.

I think Al and willy have been throwing around patches to tell
iomap_dio_rw or someone that the caller will handle cache flushes and
that it shouldn't initiate them on its own; would that help here?

--D

> > 
> > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > > index e10838879538..c2400ea0080b 100644
> > > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > > @@ -1671,6 +1671,7 @@ struct f2fs_sb_info {
> > >  	int dir_level;				/* directory level */
> > >  	int readdir_ra;				/* readahead inode in readdir */
> > >  	u64 max_io_bytes;			/* max io bytes to merge IOs */
> > > +	int no_fua_dio;				/* avoid FUA in DIO */
> > 
> > Make this a bool?
> 
> Done.
> 
> > 
> > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c b/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> > > index 4c50aedd5144..24d628ca92cc 100644
> > > --- a/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> > > @@ -771,6 +771,7 @@ F2FS_RW_ATTR(F2FS_SBI, f2fs_sb_info, iostat_period_ms, iostat_period_ms);
> > >  #endif
> > >  F2FS_RW_ATTR(F2FS_SBI, f2fs_sb_info, readdir_ra, readdir_ra);
> > >  F2FS_RW_ATTR(F2FS_SBI, f2fs_sb_info, max_io_bytes, max_io_bytes);
> > > +F2FS_RW_ATTR(F2FS_SBI, f2fs_sb_info, no_fua_dio, no_fua_dio);
> > >  F2FS_RW_ATTR(F2FS_SBI, f2fs_sb_info, gc_pin_file_thresh, gc_pin_file_threshold);
> > >  F2FS_RW_ATTR(F2FS_SBI, f2fs_super_block, extension_list, extension_list);
> > >  #ifdef CONFIG_F2FS_FAULT_INJECTION
> > > @@ -890,6 +891,7 @@ static struct attribute *f2fs_attrs[] = {
> > >  #endif
> > >  	ATTR_LIST(readdir_ra),
> > >  	ATTR_LIST(max_io_bytes),
> > > +	ATTR_LIST(no_fua_dio),
> > 
> > Where is it validated that only valid values (0 or 1) can be written to this
> > file?
> 
> Added.
> 
> > 
> > - Eric