linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 08/16] block: Limit atomic write IO size according to atomic_write_max

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: <ZXu5rykouOcNOSa1@fedora>
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2023 10:27:59 +0800
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
To: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
Cc: axboe@...nel.dk, kbusch@...nel.org, hch@....de, sagi@...mberg.me,
	jejb@...ux.ibm.com, martin.petersen@...cle.com, djwong@...nel.org,
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org, dchinner@...hat.com,
	jack@...e.cz, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	tytso@....edu, jbongio@...gle.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
	jaswin@...ux.ibm.com, bvanassche@....org, ming.lei@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/16] block: Limit atomic write IO size according to
 atomic_write_max_sectors

On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 11:08:36AM +0000, John Garry wrote:
> Currently an IO size is limited to the request_queue limits max_sectors.
> Limit the size for an atomic write to queue limit atomic_write_max_sectors
> value.
> 
> Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
> ---
>  block/blk-merge.c | 12 +++++++++++-
>  block/blk.h       |  3 +++
>  2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c
> index 0ccc251e22ff..8d4de9253fe9 100644
> --- a/block/blk-merge.c
> +++ b/block/blk-merge.c
> @@ -171,7 +171,17 @@ static inline unsigned get_max_io_size(struct bio *bio,
>  {
>  	unsigned pbs = lim->physical_block_size >> SECTOR_SHIFT;
>  	unsigned lbs = lim->logical_block_size >> SECTOR_SHIFT;
> -	unsigned max_sectors = lim->max_sectors, start, end;
> +	unsigned max_sectors, start, end;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * We ignore lim->max_sectors for atomic writes simply because
> +	 * it may less than bio->write_atomic_unit, which we cannot
> +	 * tolerate.
> +	 */
> +	if (bio->bi_opf & REQ_ATOMIC)
> +		max_sectors = lim->atomic_write_max_sectors;
> +	else
> +		max_sectors = lim->max_sectors;

I can understand the trouble for write atomic from bio split, which
may simply split in the max_sectors boundary, however this change is
still too fragile:

1) ->max_sectors may be set from userspace
- so this change simply override userspace setting

2) otherwise ->max_sectors is same with ->max_hw_sectors:

- then something must be wrong in device side or driver side because
->write_atomic_unit conflicts with ->max_hw_sectors, which is supposed
to be figured out before device is setup

3) too big max_sectors may break driver or device, such as nvme-pci
aligns max_hw_sectors with DMA optimized mapping size

And there might be more(better) choices:

1) make sure atomic write limit is respected when userspace updates
->max_sectors

2) when driver finds that atomic write limits conflict with other
existed hardware limits, fail or solve(such as reduce write atomic unit) the
conflict before queue is started; With single write atomic limits update API,
the conflict can be figured out earlier by block layer too.



thanks, 
Ming