Re: [PATCH 4/6] block: propagate BLKROSET on the whole device to all partitions

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 02:19:16PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Change the policy so that a BLKROSET on the whole device also affects
> partitions.  To quote Martin K. Petersen:
> 
> It's very common for database folks to twiddle the read-only state of
> block devices and partitions. I know that our users will find it very
> counter-intuitive that setting /dev/sda read-only won't prevent writes
> to /dev/sda1.
> 
> The existing behavior is inconsistent in the sense that doing:
> 
> permits writes. But:
> 
> <something triggers revalidate>
> 
> doesn't.
> 
> And a subsequent:
> 
> doesn't work either since sda1's read-only policy has been inherited
> from the whole-disk device.
> 
> You need to do:
> 
> after setting the whole-disk device rw to effectuate the same change on
> the partitions, otherwise they are stuck being read-only indefinitely.
> 
> However, setting the read-only policy on a partition does *not* require
> the revalidate step. As a matter of fact, doing the revalidate will blow
> away the policy setting you just made.
> 
> So the user needs to take different actions depending on whether they
> are trying to read-protect a whole-disk device or a partition. Despite
> using the same ioctl. That is really confusing.
> 
> I have lost count how many times our customers have had data clobbered
> because of ambiguity of the existing whole-disk device policy. The
> current behavior violates the principle of least surprise by letting the
> user think they write protected the whole disk when they actually
> didn't.
> 
> Suggested-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> ---
>  block/genhd.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/block/genhd.c b/block/genhd.c
> index 878f94727aaa96..c214fcd25a05c9 100644
> --- a/block/genhd.c
> +++ b/block/genhd.c
> @@ -1449,8 +1449,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(set_disk_ro);
>  
>  int bdev_read_only(struct block_device *bdev)
>  {
> -	return bdev->bd_read_only ||
> -		test_bit(GD_READ_ONLY, &bdev->bd_disk->state);
> +	return bdev->bd_read_only || get_disk_ro(bdev->bd_disk);
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(bdev_read_only);

I think this patch should be folded into previous one, otherwise
bdev_read_only(part) may return false even though ioctl(BLKROSET)
has been done on the whole disk.

-- 
Ming

--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel




[Index of Archives]     [DM Crypt]     [Fedora Desktop]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux