Re: [PATCH 4/7] block: Introduce a new ioctl for simple copy
From: Greg KH <hidden>
Date: 2021-08-17 13:11:00
Also in:
dm-devel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-nvme, linux-scsi
On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 03:44:20PM +0530, SelvaKumar S wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Nitesh Shetty <redacted> Add new BLKCOPY ioctl that offloads copying of one or more sources ranges to a destination in the device. COPY ioctl accepts a 'copy_range' structure that contains destination (in sectors), no of sources and pointer to the array of source ranges. Each source range is represented by 'range_entry' that contains start and length of source ranges (in sectors) MAX_COPY_NR_RANGE, limits the number of entries for the IOCTL and MAX_COPY_TOTAL_LENGTH limits the total copy length, IOCTL can handle. Example code, to issue BLKCOPY: /* Sample example to copy three source-ranges [0, 8] [16, 8] [32,8] to * [64,24], on the same device */ int main(void) { int ret, fd; struct range_entry source_range[] = {{.src = 0, .len = 8}, {.src = 16, .len = 8}, {.src = 32, .len = 8},}; struct copy_range cr; cr.dest = 64; cr.nr_range = 3; cr.range_list = (__u64)&source_range; fd = open("/dev/nvme0n1", O_RDWR); if (fd < 0) return 1; ret = ioctl(fd, BLKCOPY, &cr); if (ret < 0) printf("copy failure\n"); close(fd); return ret; } Signed-off-by: Nitesh Shetty <redacted> Signed-off-by: SelvaKumar S <redacted> Signed-off-by: Kanchan Joshi <redacted> --- block/ioctl.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/uapi/linux/fs.h | 8 ++++++++ 2 files changed, 41 insertions(+)diff --git a/block/ioctl.c b/block/ioctl.c index eb0491e90b9a..2af56d01e9fe 100644 --- a/block/ioctl.c +++ b/block/ioctl.c@@ -143,6 +143,37 @@ static int blk_ioctl_discard(struct block_device *bdev, fmode_t mode, GFP_KERNEL, flags); } +static int blk_ioctl_copy(struct block_device *bdev, fmode_t mode, + unsigned long arg) +{ + struct copy_range crange; + struct range_entry *rlist; + int ret; + + if (!(mode & FMODE_WRITE)) + return -EBADF; + + if (copy_from_user(&crange, (void __user *)arg, sizeof(crange))) + return -EFAULT; + + rlist = kmalloc_array(crange.nr_range, sizeof(*rlist), + GFP_KERNEL);
No error checking for huge values of nr_range? Is that wise? You really want userspace to be able to allocate "all" of the kernel memory in the system? thanks, greg k-h