Received: by 10.223.185.116 with SMTP id b49csp6923132wrg; Wed, 28 Feb 2018 18:59:44 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELtV9tE5VMesAoro/WN9/mQWkUyYjO3TDkPij8h56QZvUpeKYcmSG99E+VDg6pSxX/3VmmiM X-Received: by 10.101.75.199 with SMTP id p7mr313777pgr.0.1519873184321; Wed, 28 Feb 2018 18:59:44 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1519873184; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=H7pA5b9asfMXAUHciKBC/hzcgz9tzP+siE+gZf1rL3FN2khGAx9wK3vjJ9CFYFkdYq qzTiwLrlyxyxHHo9rOJWs81aj1Q4DO+QJtRr6doUTP0wXs3n51lJcGcw26lWxLccFHxn d8vfWwMqUtcF9cDQnn4FAnjwWwC08AMh4d0aKIWscsaQGp+Buc99VUcLvx5hS6jVTkhD GUcI8aZIlfWvSErnnu5Y3im5+CD7YolC+SNFQBiNnCequ3jK1daKoHHyr2GDO6++p8IC d14LhG4CFvrTUNdZKakCcm/6MzzXHTm/DjTvnJHurb+3334f9CqhcjtP9U3LUNI9XBYK S88g== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject:arc-authentication-results; bh=5bQkZHx+NmIYITC6/3ZJcWNAqkHV4V+wANg2kP3EGKE=; b=LkkONp3hiCXYuFmF5dfa7kBFgulCOnkQy9joerPZhADXYZLLNYLfUtqqQP1B9TM+wP diZ+Vz3pYjqoF0dxvtn/+T+bNMcE7G5CBAPeOUCuTZBqAthpK6YVLJKZM6btbp4GkyeQ 9Tm2qFKE8ZDwQQfZYv9Gkzf72jTZFgrmeSPXowJasv8mwctDaQb4oXoKtjTl1vCWYQvm z6LucAV5eDgq6FNg2ewSyR+Jh2kDb9c19E/RKRVhkBUe9iderQAmopE+g2GFcnspoq61 EW9fbWjuJfDIt4qWjKUhZve9f0PjaQ1LmQa7Kh/sqaQtqrt6BICqC3fEwdTw01drn3wN +NQg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id w130si2198615pfd.280.2018.02.28.18.59.29; Wed, 28 Feb 2018 18:59:44 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965572AbeCAC6x (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 28 Feb 2018 21:58:53 -0500 Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.190]:5690 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965531AbeCAC6w (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Feb 2018 21:58:52 -0500 Received: from DGGEMS407-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.60]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id E34A9651F216C; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 10:58:38 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.134.22.195) by DGGEMS407-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.207) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.361.1; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 10:58:31 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] Revert "f2fs crypto: avoid unneeded memory allocation in ->readdir" To: Jaegeuk Kim CC: Yunlong Song , , , , , , , , References: <1519463698-60555-1-git-send-email-yunlong.song@huawei.com> <1519787857-107910-1-git-send-email-yunlong.song@huawei.com> <20180228054810.GB86647@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> <20180301025009.GC18665@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> From: Chao Yu Message-ID: <7836e341-f2ad-0037-6efc-9927a82e51dd@huawei.com> Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2018 11:02:55 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180301025009.GC18665@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.134.22.195] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2018/3/1 10:50, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 02/28, Chao Yu wrote: >> Hi Jaegeuk, >> >> On 2018/2/28 13:48, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>> Hi Yunlong, >>> >>> As Eric pointed out, how do you think using nohighmem for directory likewise >> >> I'd like to ask, at the beginning, why we choose to use highmem for dentry page? >> any history reason there? > > There was no huge preference on it based on performance. I just wanted not to > abuse lowmem. Got you, thanks for explanation. Thanks, > > Thanks, > >> >>> ext4, which looks like more efficient? Actually, we don't need to do this in >>> most of recent kernels, right? >> >> It's OK to me to keep a line with ext4. >> >> Thanks, >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> On 02/28, Yunlong Song wrote: >>>> This reverts commit e06f86e61d7a67fe6e826010f57aa39c674f4b1b. >>>> >>>> Conflicts: >>>> fs/f2fs/dir.c >>>> >>>> In some platforms (such as arm), high memory is used, then the >>>> decrypting filename will cause panic, the reason see commit >>>> 569cf1876a32e574ba8a7fb825cd91bafd003882 ("f2fs crypto: allocate buffer >>>> for decrypting filename"): >>>> >>>> We got dentry pages from high_mem, and its address space directly goes into the >>>> decryption path via f2fs_fname_disk_to_usr. >>>> But, sg_init_one assumes the address is not from high_mem, so we can get this >>>> panic since it doesn't call kmap_high but kunmap_high is triggered at the end. >>>> >>>> kernel BUG at ../../../../../../kernel/mm/highmem.c:290! >>>> Internal error: Oops - BUG: 0 [#1] PREEMPT SMP ARM >>>> ... >>>> (kunmap_high+0xb0/0xb8) from [] (__kunmap_atomic+0xa0/0xa4) >>>> (__kunmap_atomic+0xa0/0xa4) from [] (blkcipher_walk_done+0x128/0x1ec) >>>> (blkcipher_walk_done+0x128/0x1ec) from [] (crypto_cbc_decrypt+0xc0/0x170) >>>> (crypto_cbc_decrypt+0xc0/0x170) from [] (crypto_cts_decrypt+0xc0/0x114) >>>> (crypto_cts_decrypt+0xc0/0x114) from [] (async_decrypt+0x40/0x48) >>>> (async_decrypt+0x40/0x48) from [] (f2fs_fname_disk_to_usr+0x124/0x304) >>>> (f2fs_fname_disk_to_usr+0x124/0x304) from [] (f2fs_fill_dentries+0xac/0x188) >>>> (f2fs_fill_dentries+0xac/0x188) from [] (f2fs_readdir+0x1f0/0x300) >>>> (f2fs_readdir+0x1f0/0x300) from [] (vfs_readdir+0x90/0xb4) >>>> (vfs_readdir+0x90/0xb4) from [] (SyS_getdents64+0x64/0xcc) >>>> (SyS_getdents64+0x64/0xcc) from [] (ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x30) >>>> >>>> Howerver, later patch: >>>> commit e06f86e61d7a ("f2fs crypto: avoid unneeded memory allocation in ->readdir") >>>> reverts the codes, which causes panic again in arm, so fix it back to the old version. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Yunlong Song >>>> Reviewed-by: Chao Yu >>>> --- >>>> fs/f2fs/dir.c | 7 +++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/dir.c b/fs/f2fs/dir.c >>>> index f00b5ed..de2e295 100644 >>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/dir.c >>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/dir.c >>>> @@ -825,9 +825,16 @@ int f2fs_fill_dentries(struct dir_context *ctx, struct f2fs_dentry_ptr *d, >>>> int save_len = fstr->len; >>>> int err; >>>> >>>> + de_name.name = f2fs_kmalloc(sbi, de_name.len, GFP_NOFS); >>>> + if (!de_name.name) >>>> + return -ENOMEM; >>>> + >>>> + memcpy(de_name.name, d->filename[bit_pos], de_name.len); >>>> + >>>> err = fscrypt_fname_disk_to_usr(d->inode, >>>> (u32)de->hash_code, 0, >>>> &de_name, fstr); >>>> + kfree(de_name.name); >>>> if (err) >>>> return err; >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 1.8.5.2 >>> >>> . >>> > > . >