linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 11/39] netfs: Implement unbuffered/DIO vs buffered I/O locking

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:   Wed, 13 Dec 2023 11:30:04 -0500
From:   Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@...istor.com>,
        Paulo Alcantara <pc@...guebit.com>,
        Shyam Prasad N <sprasad@...rosoft.com>,
        Tom Talpey <tom@...pey.com>,
        Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>,
        Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@...nel.org>,
        Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
        linux-cachefs@...hat.com, linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
        ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org, v9fs@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/39] netfs: Implement unbuffered/DIO vs buffered
 I/O locking

On Wed, 2023-12-13 at 11:08 -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-12-13 at 15:23 +0000, David Howells wrote:
> > Borrow NFS's direct-vs-buffered I/O locking into netfslib.  Similar code is
> > also used in ceph.
> > 
> > Modify it to have the correct checker annotations for i_rwsem lock
> > acquisition/release and to return -ERESTARTSYS if waits are interrupted.
> > 
> 
> This is just adding new infrastructure. It'd be nice to go ahead and
> convert a filesystem to use this at the same time. Ceph would be a good
> candidate. Otherwise, I'm not sure how this shakes out as far as
> cleanliness in the callers.
> 

Nevermind...I misunderstood what you were trying to do here. You're not
subsuming this into common code that filesystems will use directly, this
is just using the same scheme when doing I/O using netfs helpers.

Ceph and other filesystems will get converted to this when they are
converted to do all of their I/O via netfs.
-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>