From: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Alasdair Kergon <agk@redhat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@kernel.org>,
dm-devel@lists.linux.dev, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>, Yu Zhe <yuzhe@nfschina.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] dm-integrity: reduce stack usage for recheck
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2024 14:48:03 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <32883d32-afa6-78fb-d431-93bbb3a9fce8@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b36796cd-e6f-b964-fe0-5a77114aa710@redhat.com>
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
The newly added integrity_recheck() function has another larger stack
allocation, just like its caller integrity_metadata(). When it gets
inlined, the combination of the two exceeds the warning limit for 32-bit
architectures and possibly risks an overflow when this is called from
a deep call chain through a file system:
drivers/md/dm-integrity.c:1767:13: error: stack frame size (1048) exceeds limit (1024) in 'integrity_metadata' [-Werror,-Wframe-larger-than]
1767 | static void integrity_metadata(struct work_struct *w)
Since the caller at this point is done using its checksum buffer,
just reuse the same buffer in the new function to avoid the double
allocation.
Mikulas: I also added "noinline" to integrity_recheck and verity_recheck.
These functions are only called on error, so they shouldn't bloat the
stack frame or code size of the caller.
Fixes: c88f5e553fe3 ("dm-integrity: recheck the integrity tag after a failure")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Signed-off-by: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
---
drivers/md/dm-integrity.c | 9 ++++-----
drivers/md/dm-verity-target.c | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6/drivers/md/dm-integrity.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/md/dm-integrity.c 2024-02-24 13:53:02.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6/drivers/md/dm-integrity.c 2024-02-24 13:54:17.000000000 +0100
@@ -1691,14 +1691,13 @@ failed:
get_random_bytes(result, ic->tag_size);
}
-static void integrity_recheck(struct dm_integrity_io *dio)
+static noinline void integrity_recheck(struct dm_integrity_io *dio, char *checksum)
{
struct bio *bio = dm_bio_from_per_bio_data(dio, sizeof(struct dm_integrity_io));
struct dm_integrity_c *ic = dio->ic;
struct bvec_iter iter;
struct bio_vec bv;
sector_t sector, logical_sector, area, offset;
- char checksum_onstack[max_t(size_t, HASH_MAX_DIGESTSIZE, MAX_TAG_SIZE)];
struct page *page;
void *buffer;
@@ -1735,8 +1734,8 @@ static void integrity_recheck(struct dm_
}
integrity_sector_checksum(ic, logical_sector, buffer,
- checksum_onstack);
- r = dm_integrity_rw_tag(ic, checksum_onstack, &dio->metadata_block,
+ checksum);
+ r = dm_integrity_rw_tag(ic, checksum, &dio->metadata_block,
&dio->metadata_offset, ic->tag_size, TAG_CMP);
if (r) {
if (r > 0) {
@@ -1851,7 +1850,7 @@ again:
checksums_ptr - checksums, dio->op == REQ_OP_READ ? TAG_CMP : TAG_WRITE);
if (unlikely(r)) {
if (r > 0) {
- integrity_recheck(dio);
+ integrity_recheck(dio, checksums);
goto skip_io;
}
if (likely(checksums != checksums_onstack))
Index: linux-2.6/drivers/md/dm-verity-target.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/md/dm-verity-target.c 2024-02-24 13:52:21.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6/drivers/md/dm-verity-target.c 2024-02-24 13:55:42.000000000 +0100
@@ -491,8 +491,8 @@ static int verity_recheck_copy(struct dm
return 0;
}
-static int verity_recheck(struct dm_verity *v, struct dm_verity_io *io,
- struct bvec_iter start, sector_t cur_block)
+static noinline int verity_recheck(struct dm_verity *v, struct dm_verity_io *io,
+ struct bvec_iter start, sector_t cur_block)
{
struct page *page;
void *buffer;
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-24 13:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-24 12:12 [PATCH] dm-integrity: reduce stack usage for recheck Arnd Bergmann
2024-02-24 13:44 ` Mikulas Patocka
2024-02-24 13:48 ` Mikulas Patocka [this message]
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=32883d32-afa6-78fb-d431-93bbb3a9fce8@redhat.com \
--to=mpatocka@redhat.com \
--cc=agk@redhat.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=arnd@kernel.org \
--cc=dm-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=ebiggers@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=snitzer@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=yuzhe@nfschina.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