Linux RAID subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Yu Kuai" <yukuai@kernel.org>
Cc: yukuai@fygo.io, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 19/29] md/md-llbitmap: add reshape range mapping helpers
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2026 20:31:17 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260802203118.00A181F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260802195038.164272-20-yukuai@kernel.org>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 4 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Critical] Missing implementation of `bitmap_array_sectors` and `bitmap_sector_map` in RAID personalities breaks range mapping and drops valid array writes.
- [Critical] Omitted post-mapping clamp allows out-of-bounds offsets to trigger out-of-bounds array accesses in `llbitmap_start_write`.
- [Critical] Decoupled reshape geometry logic causes `start_sync` to decode modified bits incorrectly during array recovery.
- [High] Skipping reshape boundary splitting when `MD_RECOVERY_RESHAPE` is clear corrupts straddling bios.
--

--- Patch [19]: [PATCH v5 19/29] md/md-llbitmap: add reshape range mapping helpers ---
commit 633da220a726aec9691f97e3c1481f36882f4315
Author: Yu Kuai <yukuai@fygo.io>

md/md-llbitmap: add reshape range mapping helpers

Teach llbitmap to choose old versus new geometry during reshape and to
encode exact bitmap ranges for the active geometry. This is the mapping
groundwork for checkpoint remapping.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260726185916.2223460-1-mykola@meshstor.io/

> diff --git a/drivers/md/md-llbitmap.c b/drivers/md/md-llbitmap.c
> index f8a1b0f79be6a..fa16a4224c45a 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/md-llbitmap.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/md-llbitmap.c

[ ... ]

> +static sector_t llbitmap_logical_size(struct llbitmap *llbitmap, bool previous)
> +{
> +	struct mddev *mddev = llbitmap->mddev;
> +
> +	if (!mddev->private || !mddev->pers ||
> +	    !mddev->pers->bitmap_array_sectors)
> +		return llbitmap_personality_sync_size(llbitmap, previous);
> +	return mddev->pers->bitmap_array_sectors(mddev, previous);
> +}

[Severity: Critical]
Since bitmap_array_sectors is absent from all RAID personalities in this
patch series, won't this always fall back to
llbitmap_personality_sync_size()?

If a write is issued to a RAID5 array at a logical offset greater than
dev_sectors, it appears this will incorrectly use the physical component
size (dev_sectors) as the limit for the logical array offset, causing
llbitmap_map_layout() to drop valid array writes.

[ ... ]

> +static void llbitmap_map_layout(struct llbitmap *llbitmap, sector_t *offset,
> +				unsigned long *sectors, bool previous)
> +{

[ ... ]

> +	if (llbitmap->mddev->pers->bitmap_sector_map)
> +		llbitmap->mddev->pers->bitmap_sector_map(llbitmap->mddev, offset,
> +							 sectors, previous);
> +	else if (!previous && llbitmap->mddev->pers->bitmap_sector)
> +		llbitmap->mddev->pers->bitmap_sector(llbitmap->mddev, offset,
> +							 sectors);
> +}

[Severity: Critical]
The commit message states we need to keep the existing sync-size clamp after
mapping, but does this code actually enforce that post-mapping clamp?

Without a clamp against llbitmap_personality_sync_size() here at the end
of the function, could an out-of-bounds logical offset bypass filtering?
If that happens, llbitmap_start_write() could calculate an out-of-bounds
page_start index and trigger memory corruption inside
llbitmap_raise_barrier() before the state machine drops it.

[ ... ]

> +static void llbitmap_encode_range(struct llbitmap *llbitmap, sector_t *offset,
> +				  unsigned long *sectors, bool previous)
> +{
> +	unsigned long chunksize = previous ? llbitmap->chunksize :
> +				      llbitmap->reshape_chunksize;

[ ... ]

> +	start = div64_u64(*offset, chunksize);
> +	end = div64_u64(*offset + *sectors - 1, chunksize);
> +	*offset = (sector_t)start << llbitmap->chunkshift;
> +	*sectors = (end - start + 1) << llbitmap->chunkshift;
> +}

[Severity: Critical]
Does this decoupling of reshape geometry logic cause issues for the sync path
during recovery?

Here, writers calculate the chunk index using the new geometry
(reshape_chunksize) but scale it using the old chunkshift. Later, during
array recovery, llbitmap_start_sync() unconditionally shifts the physical
component offset by the old chunkshift:

unsigned long p = offset >> llbitmap->chunkshift;

Will this mismatch cause llbitmap_start_sync() to decode the wrong bit
index and skip recovering modified active data?

[ ... ]

> +static bool llbitmap_map_previous(struct llbitmap *llbitmap, sector_t offset,
> +				  unsigned long sectors)
> +{
> +	struct mddev *mddev = llbitmap->mddev;
> +	sector_t boundary = READ_ONCE(mddev->reshape_position);
> +
> +	if (boundary == MaxSector)
> +		return false;
> +
> +	WARN_ON_ONCE(sectors && offset < boundary && offset + sectors > boundary);
> +
> +	return mddev->reshape_backwards ? offset < boundary : offset >= boundary;
> +}

[Severity: High]
Can a straddling bio trigger this WARN_ON_ONCE and corrupt the bitmap if a
reshape is paused?

If a user pauses a reshape or the array enters a degraded state,
MD_RECOVERY_RESHAPE might be cleared. If mddev_bio_split_at_reshape_offset()
checks this flag and skips splitting the bio, a fully unsplit straddling
bio could reach here. This would force the entire bio to be evaluated
against a single geometry based purely on its starting sector, destroying
bitmap integrity for the straddling tail.

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260802195038.164272-1-yukuai@kernel.org?part=19

  reply	other threads:[~2026-08-02 20:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-02 19:50 [PATCH v5 00/29] md: improve lockless bitmap reshape support Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 01/29] md/md-llbitmap: clear flush state after daemon flush Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:28   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 02/29] md/md-llbitmap: use GFP_NOIO for cache allocations Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:44   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 03/29] md/md-llbitmap: only end fully synced chunks Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 04/29] md/raid5: reject zero-sector reshape chunks Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:31   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 05/29] md/raid5: round bitmap stripes with sector division Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:19   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 06/29] md: wait for behind writes before destroying bitmap Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:40   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 07/29] md: avoid stale clone I/O accounting timestamps Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:45   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 08/29] md/md-llbitmap: prevent create failure bitmap UAF Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:39   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 09/29] md/md-llbitmap: stop daemon timer rearm on destroy Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:19   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 10/29] md: skip bitmap accounting for empty write ranges Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 11/29] md: add helper to split bios at reshape offset Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:19   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 12/29] md: add exact bitmap mapping and reshape hooks Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 13/29] md/md-llbitmap: track bitmap sync_size explicitly Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:24   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 14/29] md/md-llbitmap: allocate page controls independently Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:27   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 15/29] md/md-llbitmap: grow the page cache in place for reshape Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:37   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 16/29] md/md-llbitmap: track target reshape geometry fields Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:25   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 17/29] md/md-llbitmap: finish reshape geometry Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:39   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 18/29] md/md-llbitmap: refuse reshape while llbitmap still needs sync Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:44   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 19/29] md/md-llbitmap: add reshape range mapping helpers Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:31   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 20/29] md/md-llbitmap: don't skip reshape ranges from bitmap state Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:31   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 21/29] md/md-llbitmap: remap checkpointed bits as reshape progresses Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:43   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 22/29] md/md-llbitmap: clamp state-machine walks to tracked bits Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 23/29] md/raid10: reject llbitmap reshape when md chunk shrinks Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:40   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 24/29] md/raid10: wire llbitmap reshape lifecycle Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:49   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 25/29] md/raid10: split reshape bios before bitmap accounting Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:46   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 26/29] md/raid5: add exact old and new llbitmap mapping helpers Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 27/29] md/raid5: reject llbitmap reshape when md chunk shrinks Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:42   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 28/29] md/raid5: wire llbitmap reshape lifecycle Yu Kuai
2026-08-02 20:46   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-02 19:50 ` [PATCH v5 29/29] md/raid5: split reshape bios before bitmap accounting Yu Kuai
2026-08-03 12:11 ` [PATCH v5 00/29] md: improve lockless bitmap reshape support Mykola Marzhan

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=20260802203118.00A181F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=yukuai@fygo.io \
    --cc=yukuai@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