linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 01/22] fs: Add generic_atomic_write_valid

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: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 08:35:53 +0100
From: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
Cc: axboe@...nel.dk, tytso@....edu, dchinner@...hat.com,
        viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org, jack@...e.com,
        chandan.babu@...cle.com, hch@....de, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        gfs2@...ts.linux.dev, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
        catherine.hoang@...cle.com, ritesh.list@...il.com, mcgrof@...nel.org,
        mikulas@...ax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, agruenba@...hat.com,
        miklos@...redi.hu, martin.petersen@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/22] fs: Add generic_atomic_write_valid_size()

On 12/06/2024 22:10, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 02:38:58PM +0000, John Garry wrote:
>> Add a generic helper for FSes to validate that an atomic write is
>> appropriately sized (along with the other checks).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
>> ---
>>   include/linux/fs.h | 12 ++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
>> index 069cbab62700..e13d34f8c24e 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/fs.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
>> @@ -3645,4 +3645,16 @@ bool generic_atomic_write_valid(loff_t pos, struct iov_iter *iter)
>>   	return true;
>>   }
>>   
>> +static inline
>> +bool generic_atomic_write_valid_size(loff_t pos, struct iov_iter *iter,
>> +				unsigned int unit_min, unsigned int unit_max)
>> +{
>> +	size_t len = iov_iter_count(iter);
>> +
>> +	if (len < unit_min || len > unit_max)
>> +		return false;
>> +
>> +	return generic_atomic_write_valid(pos, iter);
>> +}
> 
> Now that I look back at "fs: Initial atomic write support" I wonder why
> not pass the iocb and the iov_iter instead of pos and the iov_iter?

The original user of generic_atomic_write_valid() 
[blkdev_dio_unaligned() or blkdev_dio_invalid() with the rename] used 
these same args, so I just went with that.

> And can these be collapsed into a single generic_atomic_write_checks()
> function?

bdev file operations would then need to use 
generic_atomic_write_valid_size(), and there is no unit_min and unit_max 
size there, apart from bdev awu min and max. And if I checked them, we 
would be duplicating checks (of awu min and max) in the block layer.

Cheers,
John