On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 8:51 PM Michael S. Tsirkin [off-list ref] wrote:

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 08:34:22PM +0800, Yongji Xie wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 8:21 PM Michael S. Tsirkin [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 01:40:41PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 06:42:43AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:

quoted

Stefan also pointed out this duplicates the logic from

        if (blksize < 512 || blksize > PAGE_SIZE || !is_power_of_2(blksize))
                return -EINVAL;


and a bunch of other places.


Would it be acceptable for blk layer to validate the input
instead of having each driver do it's own thing?
Maybe inside blk_queue_logical_block_size?

I'm pretty sure we want down that before.  Let's just add a helper
just for that check for now as part of this series.  Actually validating
in in blk_queue_logical_block_size seems like a good idea, but returning
errors from that has a long tail.

Xie Yongji, I think I will revert this patch for now - can you
please work out adding that helper and using it in virtio?

Fine, I will do it.

Thanks,
Yongji

Great, thanks! And while at it, pls research a bit more and mention
in the commit log what is the result of an illegal blk size?
Is it memory corruption? A catastrophic failure?
If it's one of these cases, then it's ok to just fail probe.

Sure, and I think it will be one of these cases. Will add some stack
dump in the commit log.

Thanks,
Yongji