linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v2 5/9] ext4: make ext4_es_insert_delayed

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 18:27:25 +0200
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@...weicloud.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, tytso@....edu,
	adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, yi.zhang@...wei.com,
	chengzhihao1@...wei.com, yukuai3@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/9] ext4: make ext4_es_insert_delayed_block() insert
 multi-blocks

On Mon 29-04-24 20:09:46, Zhang Yi wrote:
> On 2024/4/29 17:16, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Wed 10-04-24 11:41:59, Zhang Yi wrote:
> >> From: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@...wei.com>
> >>
> >> Rename ext4_es_insert_delayed_block() to ext4_es_insert_delayed_extent()
> >> and pass length parameter to make it insert multi delalloc blocks once a
> >> time. For the case of bigalloc, expand the allocated parameter to
> >> lclu_allocated and end_allocated. lclu_allocated indicates the allocate
> >> state of the cluster which containing the lblk, end_allocated represents
> >> the end, and the middle clusters must be unallocated.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@...wei.com>
...
> >> @@ -2112,13 +2124,22 @@ void ext4_es_insert_delayed_block(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk,
> >>  		es2 = NULL;
> >>  	}
> >>  
> >> -	if (allocated) {
> >> -		err3 = __insert_pending(inode, lblk, &pr);
> >> +	if (lclu_allocated) {
> >> +		err3 = __insert_pending(inode, lblk, &pr1);
> >>  		if (err3 != 0)
> >>  			goto error;
> >> -		if (pr) {
> >> -			__free_pending(pr);
> >> -			pr = NULL;
> >> +		if (pr1) {
> >> +			__free_pending(pr1);
> >> +			pr1 = NULL;
> >> +		}
> >> +	}
> >> +	if (end_allocated) {
> > 
> > So there's one unclear thing here: What if 'lblk' and 'end' are in the same
> > cluster? We don't want two pending reservation structures for the cluster.
> > __insert_pending() already handles this gracefully but perhaps we don't
> > need to allocate 'pr2' in that case and call __insert_pending() at all? I
> > think it could be easily handled by something like:
> > 
> > 	if (EXT4_B2C(lblk) == EXT4_B2C(end))
> > 		end_allocated = false;
> > 
> > at appropriate place in ext4_es_insert_delayed_extent().
> > 
> 
> I've done the check "EXT4_B2C(lblk) == EXT4_B2C(end)" in the caller
> ext4_insert_delayed_blocks() in patch 8, becasue there is no need to check
> the allocation state if they are in the same cluster, so it could make sure
> that end_allocated is always false when 'lblk' and 'end' are in the same
> cluster. So I suppose check and set it here again maybe redundant, how about
> add a wanging here in ext4_es_insert_delayed_extent(), like:
> 
> 	WARN_ON_ONCE((EXT4_B2C(sbi, lblk) == EXT4_B2C(sbi, end)) &&
> 		     end_allocated);
> 
> and modify the 'lclu_allocated/end_allocated' parameter comments, note that
> end_allocated should always be set to false if the extent is in one cluster.
> Is it fine?

Yes, that is a good solution as well!

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
SUSE Labs, CR