On Fri, 24 Aug 2018, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > > > On Fri, 24 Aug 2018, Herbert Xu wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 04:39:23PM -0400, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > > > > > > 1. don't set CRYPTO_TFM_REQ_MAY_SLEEP in dm-crypt > > > ================================================= > > > If we don't set it, dm-crypt will use GFP_ATOMIC and GFP_ATOMIC may fail. > > > The function init_crypt in xts.c handles the failure gracefully - but the > > > question is - does the whole crypto code handle allocation failures > > > gracefully? If not and if it returns -ENOMEM somewhere, it would result in > > > I/O errors and data corruption. > > > > It is safe to use GFP_ATOMIC. First of the allocation is really > > small (less than a page) so it will only fail when the system is > > almost completely out of memory. > > GFP_ATOMIC is used by networking code. If the system is in a situation > when packets arrive faster than the swapper is able to swap, it will > happen. It does happen during netwoking surge and corrupting the > filesystem in tris situation is not acceptable. > > > Even when it does fail the crypto > > operation will still succeed, albeit it will process things at a > > smaller granularity so the performance will degrade. > > A quick search through the crypto code shows that ahash_save_req and > seqiv_aead_encrypt return -ENOMEM. > > Will you fix them? And also ablkcipher_next_slow, ablkcipher_copy_iv, skcipher_next_slow, skcipher_next_copy, skcipher_copy_iv, blkcipher_next_slow, blkcipher_copy_iv. So, I think that dropping CRYPTO_TFM_REQ_MAY_SLEEP is not possible. Mikulas -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
