From: Uday Shankar <ushankar@purestorage.com>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Uday Shankar <ushankar@purestorage.com>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 1/5] ublk: check recovery flags for validity
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2024 12:24:14 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241007182419.3263186-2-ushankar@purestorage.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241007182419.3263186-1-ushankar@purestorage.com>
Setting UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY_REISSUE without also setting
UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY is currently silently equivalent to not setting any
recovery flags at all, even though that's obviously not intended. Check
for this case and fail add_dev (with a paranoid warning to aid debugging
any program which might rely on the old behavior) with EINVAL if it is
detected.
Signed-off-by: Uday Shankar <ushankar@purestorage.com>
Reviewed-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
---
drivers/block/ublk_drv.c | 11 +++++++++++
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c b/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
index a6c8e5cc6051..318a4dfe8266 100644
--- a/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
+++ b/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
@@ -62,6 +62,9 @@
| UBLK_F_USER_COPY \
| UBLK_F_ZONED)
+#define UBLK_F_ALL_RECOVERY_FLAGS (UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY \
+ | UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY_REISSUE)
+
/* All UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_* should be included here */
#define UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_ALL \
(UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_BASIC | UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_DISCARD | \
@@ -2372,6 +2375,14 @@ static int ublk_ctrl_add_dev(struct io_uring_cmd *cmd)
else if (!(info.flags & UBLK_F_UNPRIVILEGED_DEV))
return -EPERM;
+ /* forbid nonsense combinations of recovery flags */
+ if ((info.flags & UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY_REISSUE) &&
+ !(info.flags & UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY)) {
+ pr_warn("%s: invalid recovery flags %llx\n", __func__,
+ info.flags & UBLK_F_ALL_RECOVERY_FLAGS);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
/*
* unprivileged device can't be trusted, but RECOVERY and
* RECOVERY_REISSUE still may hang error handling, so can't
--
2.34.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-07 18:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-07 18:24 [PATCH v4 0/5] ublk: support device recovery without I/O queueing Uday Shankar
2024-10-07 18:24 ` Uday Shankar [this message]
2024-10-07 18:24 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] ublk: refactor recovery configuration flag helpers Uday Shankar
2024-10-07 18:24 ` [PATCH v4 3/5] ublk: merge stop_work and quiesce_work Uday Shankar
2024-10-07 18:24 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] ublk: support device recovery without I/O queueing Uday Shankar
2024-10-08 2:48 ` Ming Lei
2024-10-07 18:24 ` [PATCH v4 5/5] Documentation: ublk: document UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY_FAIL_IO Uday Shankar
2024-10-08 2:49 ` Ming Lei
2024-10-08 15:07 ` [PATCH v4 0/5] ublk: support device recovery without I/O queueing Jens Axboe
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=20241007182419.3263186-2-ushankar@purestorage.com \
--to=ushankar@purestorage.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox