| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20241101033330.GE2386201@frogsfrogsfrogs>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 20:33:30 -0700
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
To: Ritesh Harjani <ritesh.list@...il.com>
Cc: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] ext4: Add statx support for atomic writes
On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 08:00:35AM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
>
> Hi John & Darrick,
>
> "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 09:27:38PM +0530, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) wrote:
> >> This patch adds base support for atomic writes via statx getattr.
> >> On bs < ps systems, we can create FS with say bs of 16k. That means
> >> both atomic write min and max unit can be set to 16k for supporting
> >> atomic writes.
> >>
> >> Co-developed-by: Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@...il.com>
> >> ---
> >> fs/ext4/ext4.h | 9 +++++++++
> >> fs/ext4/inode.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> >> fs/ext4/super.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> 3 files changed, 54 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/fs/ext4/ext4.h b/fs/ext4/ext4.h
> >> index 44b0d418143c..6ee49aaacd2b 100644
> >> --- a/fs/ext4/ext4.h
> >> +++ b/fs/ext4/ext4.h
> >> @@ -1729,6 +1729,10 @@ struct ext4_sb_info {
> >> */
> >> struct work_struct s_sb_upd_work;
> >>
> >> + /* Atomic write unit values in bytes */
> >> + unsigned int s_awu_min;
> >> + unsigned int s_awu_max;
> >> +
> >> /* Ext4 fast commit sub transaction ID */
> >> atomic_t s_fc_subtid;
> >>
> >> @@ -3855,6 +3859,11 @@ static inline int ext4_buffer_uptodate(struct buffer_head *bh)
> >> return buffer_uptodate(bh);
> >> }
> >>
> >> +static inline bool ext4_can_atomic_write(struct super_block *sb)
> >> +{
> >> + return EXT4_SB(sb)->s_awu_min > 0;
> >
> > Huh, I was expecting you to stick to passing in the struct inode,
> > and then you end up with:
> >
> > static inline bool ext4_can_atomic_write(struct inode *inode)
> > {
> > return S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) &&
> > EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_awu_min > 0);
> > }
> >
>
> Ok. John also had commented on the same thing before.
> We may only need this, when ext4 get extsize hint support. But for now
> we mainly only need to check that EXT4 SB supports atomic write or not.
> i.e. s_awu_min should be greater than 0.
>
> But sure I can make above suggested change to keep it consistent with XFS, along
> with below discussed change (Please have a look)...
>
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> extern int ext4_block_write_begin(handle_t *handle, struct folio *folio,
> >> loff_t pos, unsigned len,
> >> get_block_t *get_block);
> >> diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> >> index 54bdd4884fe6..fcdee27b9aa2 100644
> >> --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
> >> +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> >> @@ -5578,6 +5578,20 @@ int ext4_getattr(struct mnt_idmap *idmap, const struct path *path,
> >> }
> >> }
> >>
> >> + if (S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && (request_mask & STATX_WRITE_ATOMIC)) {
> >
> > ...and then the callsites become:
> >
> > if (request_mask & STATX_WRITE_ATOMIC) {
> > unsigned int awu_min = 0, awu_max = 0;
> >
> > if (ext4_can_atomic_write(inode)) {
> > awu_min = sbi->s_awu_min;
> > awu_max = sbi->s_awu_max;
> > }
> >
> > generic_fill_statx_atomic_writes(stat, awu_min, awu_max);
> > }
> >
> > (I forget, is it bad if statx to a directory returns STATX_WRITE_ATOMIC
> > even with awu_{min,max} set to zero?)
>
> I mainly kept it consistent with XFS. But it's not a bad idea to do that.
> That will help applications check for atomic write support on the root
> directory mount point rather than creating a regular file just for
> verification. Because of below result_mask, which we only set within generic_fill_statx_atomic_writes()
>
> stat->result_mask |= STATX_WRITE_ATOMIC;
>
> If we make this change to ext4, XFS will have to fix it too, to keep
> the behavior consistent for both.
> Shall I go ahead and make the change in v4 for EXT4?
Hmmm, that's a good question -- if a program asks for STATX_WRITE_ATOMIC
on a directory, should we set the ATOMIC flag in statx.stx_mask but
leave the values as zeroes if the underlying block device/fs supports
atomic writes at all? For XFS I guess the "underlying bdev" is
determined by the directory's RTINHERIT bit && xfs_has_realtime().
Thoughts?
But maybe that doesn't make sense since (a) fundamentally you can't do a
directio write to a directory and (b) it's not that hard to create a
file, set the REALTIME bit on it as desired (on xfs) and then query the
untorn write geometry. So maybe that check should be:
if (request_mask & STATX_WRITE_ATOMIC && S_ISREG(inode->i_mode))
--D
> -ritesh
>
> >
> > Other than that nit, this looks good to me.
> >
> > --D
> >
> >> + struct ext4_sb_info *sbi = EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb);
> >> + unsigned int awu_min, awu_max;
> >> +
> >> + if (ext4_can_atomic_write(inode->i_sb)) {
> >> + awu_min = sbi->s_awu_min;
> >> + awu_max = sbi->s_awu_max;
> >> + } else {
> >> + awu_min = awu_max = 0;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + generic_fill_statx_atomic_writes(stat, awu_min, awu_max);
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> flags = ei->i_flags & EXT4_FL_USER_VISIBLE;
> >> if (flags & EXT4_APPEND_FL)
> >> stat->attributes |= STATX_ATTR_APPEND;
> >> diff --git a/fs/ext4/super.c b/fs/ext4/super.c
> >> index 16a4ce704460..ebe1660bd840 100644
> >> --- a/fs/ext4/super.c
> >> +++ b/fs/ext4/super.c
> >> @@ -4425,6 +4425,36 @@ static int ext4_handle_clustersize(struct super_block *sb)
> >> return 0;
> >> }
> >>
> >> +/*
> >> + * ext4_atomic_write_init: Initializes filesystem min & max atomic write units.
> >> + * @sb: super block
> >> + * TODO: Later add support for bigalloc
> >> + */
> >> +static void ext4_atomic_write_init(struct super_block *sb)
> >> +{
> >> + struct ext4_sb_info *sbi = EXT4_SB(sb);
> >> + struct block_device *bdev = sb->s_bdev;
> >> +
> >> + if (!bdev_can_atomic_write(bdev))
> >> + return;
> >> +
> >> + if (!ext4_has_feature_extents(sb))
> >> + return;
> >> +
> >> + sbi->s_awu_min = max(sb->s_blocksize,
> >> + bdev_atomic_write_unit_min_bytes(bdev));
> >> + sbi->s_awu_max = min(sb->s_blocksize,
> >> + bdev_atomic_write_unit_max_bytes(bdev));
> >> + if (sbi->s_awu_min && sbi->s_awu_max &&
> >> + sbi->s_awu_min <= sbi->s_awu_max) {
> >> + ext4_msg(sb, KERN_NOTICE, "Supports (experimental) DIO atomic writes awu_min: %u, awu_max: %u",
> >> + sbi->s_awu_min, sbi->s_awu_max);
> >> + } else {
> >> + sbi->s_awu_min = 0;
> >> + sbi->s_awu_max = 0;
> >> + }
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> static void ext4_fast_commit_init(struct super_block *sb)
> >> {
> >> struct ext4_sb_info *sbi = EXT4_SB(sb);
> >> @@ -5336,6 +5366,7 @@ static int __ext4_fill_super(struct fs_context *fc, struct super_block *sb)
> >>
> >> spin_lock_init(&sbi->s_bdev_wb_lock);
> >>
> >> + ext4_atomic_write_init(sb);
> >> ext4_fast_commit_init(sb);
> >>
> >> sb->s_root = NULL;
> >> --
> >> 2.46.0
> >>
> >>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists