From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 32-bit bug in iovec iterator changes
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:49:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140621234913.GQ18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140621230922.GA13188@thunk.org>
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 07:09:22PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 06:53:07AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> >
> > ed include/linux/uio.h <<EOF
> > /iov_iter_truncate/s/size_t/u64/
> > w
> > q
> > EOF
> >
> > Could you check if that fixes the sucker?
>
> The following patch (attached at the end) appears to fix the problem,
> but looking at uio.h, I'm completely confused about *why* it fixes the
> problem. In particular, iov_iter_iovec() makes no sense to me at all,
> and I don't understand how the calculation of iov_len makes any sense:
>
> .iov_len = min(iter->count,
> iter->iov->iov_len - iter->iov_offset),
Eh? We have iov[0].iov_base..iov[0].iov_base+iov[0].iov_len - 1 for
area covered by the first iovec. First iov_offset bytes have already
been consumed. And at most count bytes matter. So yes, this iov_len
will give you equivalent first iovec.
Said that, iov_iter_iovec() will die shortly - it's a rudiment of older
code, with almost no users left. But yes, it is correct.
> It also looks like uio.h is mostly about offsets to memory pointers,
> and so why this would make a difference when the issue is the block
> device offset goes above 2**30?
It is, and your patch is a huge overkill.
> There must be deep magic going on here, and so I don't know if your
> s/size_t/u64/g substitation also extends to the various functions that
> have size_t in them:
No, it does not. It's specifically about iov_iter_truncate(); moreover,
it matters to only one caller of that sucker. Namely,
static ssize_t blkdev_read_iter(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *to)
{
struct file *file = iocb->ki_filp;
struct inode *bd_inode = file->f_mapping->host;
loff_t size = i_size_read(bd_inode);
loff_t pos = iocb->ki_pos;
if (pos >= size)
return 0;
size -= pos;
iov_iter_truncate(to, size);
return generic_file_read_iter(iocb, to);
}
What happens here is capping to->count, to guarantee that we won't even look
at anything past the end of block device. Alternative fix would be to
have
if (pos >= size)
return 0;
if (to->size + pos > size) {
/* note that size - pos fits into size_t in this case,
* so it's OK to pass it to iov_iter_truncate().
*/
iov_iter_truncate(to, size - pos);
}
return generic_file_read_iter(iocb, to);
in there. Other callers are passing it size_t values already, so we don't
need similar checks there.
Or we can make iov_iter_truncate() take an arbitrary u64 argument, seeing that
it's inlined anyway. IMO it's more robust that way...
Anyway, does the following alone fix the problem you are seeing?
diff --git a/include/linux/uio.h b/include/linux/uio.h
index ddfdb53..dbb02d4 100644
--- a/include/linux/uio.h
+++ b/include/linux/uio.h
@@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ static inline size_t iov_iter_count(struct iov_iter *i)
return i->count;
}
-static inline void iov_iter_truncate(struct iov_iter *i, size_t count)
+static inline void iov_iter_truncate(struct iov_iter *i, u64 count)
{
if (i->count > count)
i->count = count;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-21 23:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-19 15:35 BUG: scheduling while atomic in blk_mq codepath? Theodore Ts'o
2014-06-19 15:59 ` Jens Axboe
2014-06-19 16:08 ` Theodore Ts'o
2014-06-19 16:21 ` Theodore Ts'o
2014-06-19 22:38 ` Dave Chinner
2014-06-21 3:51 ` 32-bit bug in iovec iterator changes Theodore Ts'o
2014-06-21 5:53 ` Al Viro
2014-06-21 23:09 ` Theodore Ts'o
2014-06-21 23:49 ` Al Viro [this message]
2014-06-22 0:03 ` James Bottomley
2014-06-22 0:26 ` Al Viro
2014-06-22 0:32 ` James Bottomley
2014-06-22 0:53 ` Al Viro
2014-06-22 1:00 ` Al Viro
2014-06-22 11:50 ` Theodore Ts'o
2014-06-23 7:44 ` [regression] fix 32-bit breakage in block device read(2) (was Re: 32-bit bug in iovec iterator changes) Al Viro
2014-06-23 15:43 ` Theodore Ts'o
2014-06-24 12:33 ` One Thousand Gnomes
2014-06-25 16:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-06-26 15:27 ` Bruno Wolff III
2014-06-22 1:00 ` 32-bit bug in iovec iterator changes James Bottomley
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=20140621234913.GQ18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=axboe@fb.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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