From: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@suse.de>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, jaegeuk@kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu,
amir73il@gmail.com, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, brauner@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 03/10] fscrypt: Drop d_revalidate for valid dentries during lookup
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 18:03:13 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87o7caagcu.fsf@mailhost.krisman.be> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240214235904.GH1638@sol.localdomain> (Eric Biggers's message of "Wed, 14 Feb 2024 15:59:04 -0800")
Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> writes:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 09:13:14PM -0500, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
>> Finally, we need to clean the dentry->flags even for unencrypted
>> dentries, so the ->d_lock might be acquired even for them. In order to
>
> might => must?
>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/fscrypt.h b/include/linux/fscrypt.h
>> index 47567a6a4f9d..d1f17b90c30f 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/fscrypt.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/fscrypt.h
>> @@ -951,10 +951,29 @@ static inline int fscrypt_prepare_rename(struct inode *old_dir,
>> static inline void fscrypt_prepare_dentry(struct dentry *dentry,
>> bool is_nokey_name)
>> {
>> + /*
>> + * This code tries to only take ->d_lock when necessary to write
>> + * to ->d_flags. We shouldn't be peeking on d_flags for
>> + * DCACHE_OP_REVALIDATE unlocked, but in the unlikely case
>> + * there is a race, the worst it can happen is that we fail to
>> + * unset DCACHE_OP_REVALIDATE and pay the cost of an extra
>> + * d_revalidate.
>> + */
>> if (is_nokey_name) {
>> spin_lock(&dentry->d_lock);
>> dentry->d_flags |= DCACHE_NOKEY_NAME;
>> spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
>> + } else if (dentry->d_flags & DCACHE_OP_REVALIDATE &&
>> + dentry->d_op->d_revalidate == fscrypt_d_revalidate) {
>> + /*
>> + * Unencrypted dentries and encrypted dentries where the
>> + * key is available are always valid from fscrypt
>> + * perspective. Avoid the cost of calling
>> + * fscrypt_d_revalidate unnecessarily.
>> + */
>> + spin_lock(&dentry->d_lock);
>> + dentry->d_flags &= ~DCACHE_OP_REVALIDATE;
>> + spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
>> }
>> }
>
> Does this all get optimized out when !CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION?
>
> As-is, I don't think the d_revalidate part will be optimized out.
>
it seems to get optimized out:
This is ext4_lookup built with CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION=n
ffffffff814ca3e0 <ext4_lookup>:
ffffffff814ca3e0: e8 5b b5 c3 ff call ffffffff81105940 <__fentry__>
ffffffff814ca3e5: 41 54 push %r12
ffffffff814ca3e7: 55 push %rbp
ffffffff814ca3e8: 53 push %rbx
ffffffff814ca3e9: 48 83 ec 58 sub $0x58,%rsp
ffffffff814ca3ed: 8b 56 24 mov 0x24(%rsi),%edx
ffffffff814ca3f0: 65 48 8b 04 25 28 00 mov %gs:0x28,%rax
ffffffff814ca3f7: 00 00
ffffffff814ca3f9: 48 89 44 24 50 mov %rax,0x50(%rsp)
ffffffff814ca3fe: 31 c0 xor %eax,%eax
ffffffff814ca400: 48 c7 c0 dc ff ff ff mov $0xffffffffffffffdc,%rax
ffffffff814ca407: 81 fa ff 00 00 00 cmp $0xff,%edx
ffffffff814ca40d: 76 21 jbe ffffffff814ca430 <ext4_lookup+0x50>
ffffffff814ca40f: 48 8b 4c 24 50 mov 0x50(%rsp),%rcx
ffffffff814ca414: 65 48 33 0c 25 28 00 xor %gs:0x28,%rcx
ffffffff814ca41b: 00 00
ffffffff814ca41d: 0f 85 cd 01 00 00 jne ffffffff814ca5f0 <ext4_lookup+0x210> <- (__stack_chk_fail)
ffffffff814ca423: 48 83 c4 58 add $0x58,%rsp
ffffffff814ca427: 5b pop %rbx
ffffffff814ca428: 5d pop %rbp
ffffffff814ca429: 41 5c pop %r12
ffffffff814ca42b: e9 70 21 8b 00 jmp ffffffff81d7c5a0 <__x86_return_thunk>
ffffffff814ca430: 48 89 f3 mov %rsi,%rbx
ffffffff814ca433: 89 54 24 20 mov %edx,0x20(%rsp)
ffffffff814ca437: 48 8d 76 20 lea 0x20(%rsi),%rsi
ffffffff814ca43b: 48 8b 43 28 mov 0x28(%rbx),%rax
ffffffff814ca43f: 48 8d 54 24 10 lea 0x10(%rsp),%rdx
ffffffff814ca444: 48 89 fd mov %rdi,%rbp
ffffffff814ca447: 48 89 74 24 10 mov %rsi,0x10(%rsp)
ffffffff814ca44c: 48 89 44 24 18 mov %rax,0x18(%rsp)
ffffffff814ca451: e8 ca f0 ff ff call ffffffff814c9520 <ext4_fname_setup_ci_filename>
[..]
I had also confirmed previously that fscrypt_lookup_prepare and
fscrypt_prepare_dentry gets correctly inlined into
ext4_fname_prepare_lookup.
> You may need to create a !CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION stub explicitly.
But, in spite of gcc doing the right thing now, fscrypt_prepare_dentry
might grow in the future. So, if you don't mind, I will still add the
stub explicitly, as you suggested.
thanks,
--
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@suse.de>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
Cc: brauner@kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu, amir73il@gmail.com,
linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, jaegeuk@kernel.org,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v6 03/10] fscrypt: Drop d_revalidate for valid dentries during lookup
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 18:03:13 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87o7caagcu.fsf@mailhost.krisman.be> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240214235904.GH1638@sol.localdomain> (Eric Biggers's message of "Wed, 14 Feb 2024 15:59:04 -0800")
Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> writes:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 09:13:14PM -0500, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
>> Finally, we need to clean the dentry->flags even for unencrypted
>> dentries, so the ->d_lock might be acquired even for them. In order to
>
> might => must?
>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/fscrypt.h b/include/linux/fscrypt.h
>> index 47567a6a4f9d..d1f17b90c30f 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/fscrypt.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/fscrypt.h
>> @@ -951,10 +951,29 @@ static inline int fscrypt_prepare_rename(struct inode *old_dir,
>> static inline void fscrypt_prepare_dentry(struct dentry *dentry,
>> bool is_nokey_name)
>> {
>> + /*
>> + * This code tries to only take ->d_lock when necessary to write
>> + * to ->d_flags. We shouldn't be peeking on d_flags for
>> + * DCACHE_OP_REVALIDATE unlocked, but in the unlikely case
>> + * there is a race, the worst it can happen is that we fail to
>> + * unset DCACHE_OP_REVALIDATE and pay the cost of an extra
>> + * d_revalidate.
>> + */
>> if (is_nokey_name) {
>> spin_lock(&dentry->d_lock);
>> dentry->d_flags |= DCACHE_NOKEY_NAME;
>> spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
>> + } else if (dentry->d_flags & DCACHE_OP_REVALIDATE &&
>> + dentry->d_op->d_revalidate == fscrypt_d_revalidate) {
>> + /*
>> + * Unencrypted dentries and encrypted dentries where the
>> + * key is available are always valid from fscrypt
>> + * perspective. Avoid the cost of calling
>> + * fscrypt_d_revalidate unnecessarily.
>> + */
>> + spin_lock(&dentry->d_lock);
>> + dentry->d_flags &= ~DCACHE_OP_REVALIDATE;
>> + spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
>> }
>> }
>
> Does this all get optimized out when !CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION?
>
> As-is, I don't think the d_revalidate part will be optimized out.
>
it seems to get optimized out:
This is ext4_lookup built with CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION=n
ffffffff814ca3e0 <ext4_lookup>:
ffffffff814ca3e0: e8 5b b5 c3 ff call ffffffff81105940 <__fentry__>
ffffffff814ca3e5: 41 54 push %r12
ffffffff814ca3e7: 55 push %rbp
ffffffff814ca3e8: 53 push %rbx
ffffffff814ca3e9: 48 83 ec 58 sub $0x58,%rsp
ffffffff814ca3ed: 8b 56 24 mov 0x24(%rsi),%edx
ffffffff814ca3f0: 65 48 8b 04 25 28 00 mov %gs:0x28,%rax
ffffffff814ca3f7: 00 00
ffffffff814ca3f9: 48 89 44 24 50 mov %rax,0x50(%rsp)
ffffffff814ca3fe: 31 c0 xor %eax,%eax
ffffffff814ca400: 48 c7 c0 dc ff ff ff mov $0xffffffffffffffdc,%rax
ffffffff814ca407: 81 fa ff 00 00 00 cmp $0xff,%edx
ffffffff814ca40d: 76 21 jbe ffffffff814ca430 <ext4_lookup+0x50>
ffffffff814ca40f: 48 8b 4c 24 50 mov 0x50(%rsp),%rcx
ffffffff814ca414: 65 48 33 0c 25 28 00 xor %gs:0x28,%rcx
ffffffff814ca41b: 00 00
ffffffff814ca41d: 0f 85 cd 01 00 00 jne ffffffff814ca5f0 <ext4_lookup+0x210> <- (__stack_chk_fail)
ffffffff814ca423: 48 83 c4 58 add $0x58,%rsp
ffffffff814ca427: 5b pop %rbx
ffffffff814ca428: 5d pop %rbp
ffffffff814ca429: 41 5c pop %r12
ffffffff814ca42b: e9 70 21 8b 00 jmp ffffffff81d7c5a0 <__x86_return_thunk>
ffffffff814ca430: 48 89 f3 mov %rsi,%rbx
ffffffff814ca433: 89 54 24 20 mov %edx,0x20(%rsp)
ffffffff814ca437: 48 8d 76 20 lea 0x20(%rsi),%rsi
ffffffff814ca43b: 48 8b 43 28 mov 0x28(%rbx),%rax
ffffffff814ca43f: 48 8d 54 24 10 lea 0x10(%rsp),%rdx
ffffffff814ca444: 48 89 fd mov %rdi,%rbp
ffffffff814ca447: 48 89 74 24 10 mov %rsi,0x10(%rsp)
ffffffff814ca44c: 48 89 44 24 18 mov %rax,0x18(%rsp)
ffffffff814ca451: e8 ca f0 ff ff call ffffffff814c9520 <ext4_fname_setup_ci_filename>
[..]
I had also confirmed previously that fscrypt_lookup_prepare and
fscrypt_prepare_dentry gets correctly inlined into
ext4_fname_prepare_lookup.
> You may need to create a !CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION stub explicitly.
But, in spite of gcc doing the right thing now, fscrypt_prepare_dentry
might grow in the future. So, if you don't mind, I will still add the
stub explicitly, as you suggested.
thanks,
--
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-20 23:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-13 2:13 [PATCH v6 00/10] Set casefold/fscrypt dentry operations through sb->s_d_op Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [f2fs-dev] " Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [PATCH v6 01/10] ovl: Always reject mounting over case-insensitive directories Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [f2fs-dev] " Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [PATCH v6 02/10] fscrypt: Factor out a helper to configure the lookup dentry Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [f2fs-dev] " Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-14 23:54 ` Eric Biggers
2024-02-14 23:54 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [PATCH v6 03/10] fscrypt: Drop d_revalidate for valid dentries during lookup Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [f2fs-dev] " Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-14 23:59 ` Eric Biggers
2024-02-14 23:59 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2024-02-20 23:03 ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi [this message]
2024-02-20 23:03 ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [PATCH v6 04/10] fscrypt: Drop d_revalidate once the key is added Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [f2fs-dev] " Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-15 0:16 ` Eric Biggers
2024-02-15 0:16 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2024-02-15 0:31 ` Eric Biggers
2024-02-15 0:31 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2024-02-20 0:48 ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-20 0:48 ` [f2fs-dev] " Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [PATCH v6 05/10] libfs: Merge encrypted_ci_dentry_ops and ci_dentry_ops Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [f2fs-dev] " Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [PATCH v6 06/10] libfs: Add helper to choose dentry operations at mount-time Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [f2fs-dev] " Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [PATCH v6 07/10] ext4: Configure dentry operations at dentry-creation time Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [f2fs-dev] " Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [PATCH v6 08/10] f2fs: " Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [f2fs-dev] " Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [PATCH v6 09/10] ubifs: " Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [f2fs-dev] " Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [PATCH v6 10/10] libfs: Drop generic_set_encrypted_ci_d_ops Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-13 2:13 ` [f2fs-dev] " Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2024-02-15 0:24 ` [PATCH v6 00/10] Set casefold/fscrypt dentry operations through sb->s_d_op Eric Biggers
2024-02-15 0:24 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
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=87o7caagcu.fsf@mailhost.krisman.be \
--to=krisman@suse.de \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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.