linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 RESEND 4/5] dm verity: Fix I/O priority lost when read FEC and hash

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: <CAMQnb4N=5jf5Hsq1Qtb-9dsPzB29-xEV3Wj_Fi1WgCuW_pv2pg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2023 09:14:56 +0800
From: Hongyu Jin <hongyu.jin.cn@...il.com>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
Cc: agk@...hat.com, snitzer@...nel.org, mpatocka@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk, 
	zhiguo.niu@...soc.com, ke.wang@...soc.com, yibin.ding@...soc.com, 
	hongyu.jin@...soc.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dm-devel@...ts.linux.dev, 
	linux-block@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 RESEND 4/5] dm verity: Fix I/O priority lost when read
 FEC and hash

Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org> 于2023年12月20日周三 06:48写道：
>
> On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 09:27:45AM +0800, Hongyu Jin wrote:
> > From: Hongyu Jin <hongyu.jin@...soc.com>
> >
> > To fix this problem, when read FEC and hash from disk, I/O priority are
> > inconsistent with data block and blocked by other I/O with low I/O
> > priority.
> >
> > Make I/O for FEC and hash has same I/O priority with original data I/O.
>
> "To fix this problem" is supposed to be in the second paragraph, not the first,
> right?
Yes, The verification and error correction process takes effect after
obtaining the data.
>
> > @@ -728,6 +730,7 @@ static void verity_submit_prefetch(struct dm_verity *v, struct dm_verity_io *io)
> >       sector_t block = io->block;
> >       unsigned int n_blocks = io->n_blocks;
> >       struct dm_verity_prefetch_work *pw;
> > +     struct bio *bio = dm_bio_from_per_bio_data(io, v->ti->per_io_data_size);
> >
> >       if (v->validated_blocks) {
> >               while (n_blocks && test_bit(block, v->validated_blocks)) {
>
> The caller has the bio pointer already, so maybe just add it as a parameter to
> verity_submit_prefetch()?
>
> - Eric
ok, I will change it.