From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
Liu Yiding <liuyd.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>,
kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@intel.com>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] block: fix .bi_size overflow
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 09:38:30 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190702013829.GB8356@ming.t460p> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8b8dc953-e663-e3d8-b991-9d8dba9270be@kernel.dk>
On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 08:20:13AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 7/1/19 8:14 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On 7/1/19 8:05 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >> On 7/1/19 1:14 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> >>> 'bio->bi_iter.bi_size' is 'unsigned int', which at most hold 4G - 1
> >>> bytes.
> >>>
> >>> Before 07173c3ec276 ("block: enable multipage bvecs"), one bio can
> >>> include very limited pages, and usually at most 256, so the fs bio
> >>> size won't be bigger than 1M bytes most of times.
> >>>
> >>> Since we support multi-page bvec, in theory one fs bio really can
> >>> be added > 1M pages, especially in case of hugepage, or big writeback
> >>> with too many dirty pages. Then there is chance in which .bi_size
> >>> is overflowed.
> >>>
> >>> Fixes this issue by using bio_full() to check if the added segment may
> >>> overflow .bi_size.
> >>
> >> Any objections to queuing this up for 5.3? It's not a new regression
> >> this series.
> >
> > I took a closer look, and applied for 5.3 and removed the stable tag.
> > We'll need to apply your patch for stable, and I added an adapted
> > one for 5.3. I don't want a huge merge hassle because of this.
>
> OK, so we still get conflicts with that, due to both the same page
> merge fix, and Christophs 5.3 changes.
>
> I ended up pulling in 5.2-rc6 in for-5.3/block, which resolves at
> least most of it, and kept the stable tag since now it's possible
> to backport without too much trouble.
Thanks for merging it.
BTW, we need the -stable tag, since Yiding has test case to reproduce
the issue reliably, which just needs one big machine with enough memory,
and fast storage, I guess.
thanks,
Ming
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-02 1:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-01 7:14 [PATCH V2] block: fix .bi_size overflow Ming Lei
2019-07-01 8:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-07-01 14:05 ` Jens Axboe
2019-07-01 14:14 ` Jens Axboe
2019-07-01 14:20 ` Jens Axboe
2019-07-02 1:38 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2019-07-02 1:54 ` 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=20190702013829.GB8356@ming.t460p \
--to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liuyd.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=rong.a.chen@intel.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).