linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v20 02/12] Add infrastructure for copy offload in block and request layer.

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: <20240523113454.6mwg6xnrkscu6yps@nj.shetty@samsung.com>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2024 11:34:54 +0000
From: Nitesh Shetty <nj.shetty@...sung.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Alasdair
	Kergon <agk@...hat.com>, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...nel.org>, Mikulas Patocka
	<mpatocka@...hat.com>, Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>, Christoph Hellwig
	<hch@....de>, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>, Chaitanya Kulkarni
	<kch@...dia.com>, Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Christian
	Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
	martin.petersen@...cle.com, david@...morbit.com, hare@...e.de,
	damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com, anuj20.g@...sung.com, joshi.k@...sung.com,
	nitheshshetty@...il.com, gost.dev@...sung.com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	dm-devel@...ts.linux.dev, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v20 02/12] Add infrastructure for copy offload in block
 and request layer.

On 22/05/24 11:05AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>On 5/20/24 03:20, Nitesh Shetty wrote:
>>We add two new opcode REQ_OP_COPY_DST, REQ_OP_COPY_SRC.
>>Since copy is a composite operation involving src and dst sectors/lba,
>>each needs to be represented by a separate bio to make it compatible
>>with device mapper.
>>We expect caller to take a plug and send bio with destination information,
>>followed by bio with source information.
>>Once the dst bio arrives we form a request and wait for source
>>bio. Upon arrival of source bio we merge these two bio's and send
>>corresponding request down to device driver.
>>Merging non copy offload bio is avoided by checking for copy specific
>>opcodes in merge function.
>
>Plugs are per task. Can the following happen?
We rely on per-context plugging to avoid this.
>* Task A calls blk_start_plug()
>* Task B calls blk_start_plug()
>* Task A submits a REQ_OP_COPY_DST bio and a REQ_OP_COPY_SRC bio.
Lets say this forms request A and stored in plug A
>* Task B submits a REQ_OP_COPY_DST bio and a REQ_OP_COPY_SRC bio.
Lets say this forms request B and stored in plug B
>* Task A calls blk_finish_plug()
>* Task B calls blk_finish_plug()
>* The REQ_OP_COPY_DST bio from task A and the REQ_OP_COPY_SRC bio from
>  task B are combined into a single request.
Here task A picks plug A and hence request A
>* The REQ_OP_COPY_DST bio from task B and the REQ_OP_COPY_SRC bio from
>  task A are combined into a single request.
same as above, request B

So we expect this case not to happen.

Thank you,
Nitesh Shetty