linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/13] xfs: always tail align maxlen allocations

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: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:50:58 -0700
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
To: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
Cc: chandan.babu@...cle.com, dchinner@...hat.com, hch@....de,
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org, jack@...e.cz,
	linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, catherine.hoang@...cle.com,
	martin.petersen@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/13] xfs: always tail align maxlen allocations

On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 10:05:29AM +0000, John Garry wrote:
> From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>
> 
> When we do a large allocation, the core free space allocation code
> assumes that args->maxlen is aligned to args->prod/args->mod. hence
> if we get a maximum sized extent allocated, it does not do tail
> alignment of the extent.
> 
> However, this assumes that nothing modifies args->maxlen between the
> original allocation context setup and trimming the selected free
> space extent to size. This assumption has recently been found to be
> invalid - xfs_alloc_space_available() modifies args->maxlen in low
> space situations - and there may be more situations we haven't yet
> found like this.
> 
> Force aligned allocation introduces the requirement that extents are
> correctly tail aligned, resulting in this occasional latent
> alignment failure to e reclassified from an unimportant curiousity

                    to be

> to a must-fix bug.
> 
> Removing the assumption about args->maxlen allocations always being
> tail aligned is trivial, and should not impact anything because
> args->maxlen for inodes with extent size hints configured are
> already aligned. Hence all this change does it avoid weird corner
> cases that would have resulted in unaligned extent sizes by always
> trimming the extent down to an aligned size.

IOWs, we always trim rlen, unless there is no alignment (prod==1) or
rlen is less than mod.  For a forcealign file, it should never be the
case that minlen < mod because we'll have returned ENOSPC, right?

> Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>

If the answer is 'yes' and the typo gets fixed,
Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@...nel.org>

--D

> ---
>  fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c | 12 +++++-------
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c
> index 5855a21d4864..32f72217c126 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c
> @@ -432,20 +432,18 @@ xfs_alloc_compute_diff(
>   * Fix up the length, based on mod and prod.
>   * len should be k * prod + mod for some k.
>   * If len is too small it is returned unchanged.
> - * If len hits maxlen it is left alone.
>   */
> -STATIC void
> +static void
>  xfs_alloc_fix_len(
> -	xfs_alloc_arg_t	*args)		/* allocation argument structure */
> +	struct xfs_alloc_arg	*args)
>  {
> -	xfs_extlen_t	k;
> -	xfs_extlen_t	rlen;
> +	xfs_extlen_t		k;
> +	xfs_extlen_t		rlen = args->len;
>  
>  	ASSERT(args->mod < args->prod);
> -	rlen = args->len;
>  	ASSERT(rlen >= args->minlen);
>  	ASSERT(rlen <= args->maxlen);
> -	if (args->prod <= 1 || rlen < args->mod || rlen == args->maxlen ||
> +	if (args->prod <= 1 || rlen < args->mod ||
>  	    (args->mod == 0 && rlen < args->prod))
>  		return;
>  	k = rlen % args->prod;
> -- 
> 2.31.1
> 
>