All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
	Tino Lehnig <tino.lehnig@contabo.de>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] zram: remove BD_CAP_SYNCHRONOUS_IO with writeback feature
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2018 14:13:04 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180802141304.d0589ddc5f8213429ab3b565@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180802051112.86174-1-minchan@kernel.org>

On Thu,  2 Aug 2018 14:11:12 +0900 Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> wrote:

> If zram supports writeback feature, it's no more syncrhonous
> device beause zram does synchronous IO opeation for
> incompressible page.
> 
> Do not pretend to be syncrhonous IO device. It makes system
> very sluggish as waiting IO completion from upper layer.
> 
> Furthermore, it makes user-after-free problem because swap
> think the opearion is done when the IO functions returns so
> it could free page by will(e.g., lock_page_or_retry and
> goto out_release in do_swap_page) but in fact, IO is
> asynchrnous so driver could access just freed page afterward.
> 
> This patch fixes the problem.

That changelog is rather hard to follow.  Please review my edits:

: If zram supports writeback feature, it's no longer a BD_CAP_SYNCHRONOUS_IO
: device beause zram does synchronous IO operations for incompressible pages.
: 
: Do not pretend to be synchronous IO device.  It makes the system very
: sluggish due to waiting for IO completion from upper layers.
: 
: Furthermore, it causes a user-after-free problem because swap thinks the
: opearion is done when the IO functions returns so it can free the page
: (e.g., lock_page_or_retry and goto out_release in do_swap_page) but in
: fact, IO is asynchrnous so the driver could access a just freed page
: afterward.
: 
: This patch fixes the problem. 

> diff --git a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
> index 7436b2d27fa3..0b6eda1bd77a 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
> @@ -298,7 +298,8 @@ static void reset_bdev(struct zram *zram)
>  	zram->backing_dev = NULL;
>  	zram->old_block_size = 0;
>  	zram->bdev = NULL;
> -
> +	zram->disk->queue->backing_dev_info->capabilities |=
> +				BDI_CAP_SYNCHRONOUS_IO;
>  	kvfree(zram->bitmap);
>  	zram->bitmap = NULL;
>  }
> @@ -400,6 +401,8 @@ static ssize_t backing_dev_store(struct device *dev,
>  	zram->backing_dev = backing_dev;
>  	zram->bitmap = bitmap;
>  	zram->nr_pages = nr_pages;
> +	zram->disk->queue->backing_dev_info->capabilities &=
> +			~BDI_CAP_SYNCHRONOUS_IO;
>  	up_write(&zram->init_lock);
>  
>  	pr_info("setup backing device %s\n", file_name);

A reader looking at this would wonder "why the heck are we doing that".
Adding a code comment would help them.

Is it legitimate to be altering the bdi capabilities at this level?  Or
is this hacky?

If "yes" then should reset_bdev() be unconditionally setting
BDI_CAP_SYNCHRONOUS_IO?  Shouldn't it be restoring that flag to its
previous setting?


  reply	other threads:[~2018-08-02 21:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-08-02  5:11 [PATCH 1/2] zram: remove BD_CAP_SYNCHRONOUS_IO with writeback feature Minchan Kim
2018-08-02 21:13 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2018-08-03  2:39   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-08-03  2:52     ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-08-03  3:00     ` Minchan Kim
2018-08-03  4:13       ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-08-03  4:51         ` Minchan Kim
2018-08-03  5:23           ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-08-03  5:45             ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-08-03  2:51   ` Minchan Kim
2018-08-03 23:28     ` Andrew Morton
2018-08-05 23:15       ` Minchan Kim

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180802141304.d0589ddc5f8213429ab3b565@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=minchan@kernel.org \
    --cc=sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tino.lehnig@contabo.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.