linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] iomap: iomap_bmap should accept unwritten maps

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 25 Aug 2020 23:30:46 +0530
From:   Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        Yuxuan Shui <yshuiv7@...il.com>
Cc:     viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
        Anju T Sudhakar <anju@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iomap: iomap_bmap should accept unwritten maps



On 8/25/20 9:19 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 06:06:49PM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 5/6/20 1:00 AM, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 07:36:08PM +0100, Yuxuan Shui wrote:
>>>> commit ac58e4fb03f9d111d733a4ad379d06eef3a24705 moved ext4_bmap from
>>>> generic_block_bmap to iomap_bmap, this introduced a regression which
>>>> prevents some user from using previously working swapfiles. The kernel
>>>> will complain about holes while there is none.
>>>>
>>>> What is happening here is that the swapfile has unwritten mappings,
>>>> which is rejected by iomap_bmap, but was accepted by ext4_get_block.
>>>
>>> ...which is why ext4 ought to use iomap_swapfile_activate.
>>
>> I tested this patch (diff below), which seems to be working fine for me
>> for straight forward use case of swapon/swapoff on ext4.
>> Could you give it a try?
>>
>> <log showing ext4_iomap_swap_activate path kicking in>
>> swapon  1283 [000]   438.651028:     250000 cpu-clock:pppH:
>> 	ffffffff817f7f56 percpu_counter_add_batch+0x26 (/boot/vmlinux)
>> 	ffffffff813a61d0 ext4_es_lookup_extent+0x1d0 (/boot/vmlinux)
>> 	ffffffff813b8095 ext4_map_blocks+0x65 (/boot/vmlinux)
>> 	ffffffff813b8d4b ext4_iomap_begin_report+0x10b (/boot/vmlinux)
>> 	ffffffff81367f58 iomap_apply+0xa8 (/boot/vmlinux)
>> 	ffffffff8136d1c3 iomap_swapfile_activate+0xb3 (/boot/vmlinux)
>> 	ffffffff813b51a5 ext4_iomap_swap_activate+0x15 (/boot/vmlinux)
>> 	ffffffff812a3a27 __do_sys_swapon+0xb37 (/boot/vmlinux)
>> 	ffffffff812a40f6 __x64_sys_swapon+0x16 (/boot/vmlinux)
>> 	ffffffff820b760a do_syscall_64+0x5a (/boot/vmlinux)
>> 	ffffffff8220007c entry_SYSCALL_64+0x7c (/boot/vmlinux)
>> 	    7ffff7de68bb swapon+0xb (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc-2.30.so)
>> 	66706177732f756d [unknown] ([unknown])
>>
>> <shows that swapfile(which I setup using fallocate) has some used bytes>
>> $ swapon -s
>> Filename                                Type            Size    Used
>> Priority
>> /home/qemu/swapfile-test                file            2097148 42312   -2
>>
>>
>> @Jan/Ted/Darrick,
>>
>> I am not that familiar with how swap subsystem works.
>> So, is there anything else you feel is required apart from below changes
>> for supporting swap_activate via iomap? I did test both swapon/swapoff
>> and see that swap is getting used up on ext4 with delalloc mount opt.
>>
>> As I see from code, iomap_swapfile_activate is mainly looking for
>> extent mapping information of that file to pass to swap subsystem.
>> And IIUC, "ext4_iomap_report_ops" is meant exactly for that.
>> Same as how we use it in ext4_fiemap().
> 
> <nod> The swap code doesn't even care about the file offsets, it just
> wants the physical mappings, and it only wants to find real and
> unwritten mappings (i.e. no holes, delalloc, or shared extents).
> 
> So ... I think it's ok to use the same iomap ops as fiemap.
> 
> FWIW the xfs version uses xfs_read_iomap_ops for reads, readahead,
> fiemap, and swapfiles, so this is ... probably fine, especially if it
> passes the swap group fstests. :)
> 

Ohh yes, thanks. :)
I tested "-g swap" fstests and those were fine.
For completion sake, I will go through generic_swapfile_activate()
just to confirm that nothing is missed.
Will try and spin a formal patch early next week -(in LPC this week)

-ritesh