Re: [PATCH] block devices: validate block device capacity
From: James Bottomley
Date: Thu Jan 30 2014 - 18:37:56 EST
On Thu, 2014-01-30 at 18:10 -0500, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>
> On Thu, 30 Jan 2014, James Bottomley wrote:
>
> > Why is this? the whole reason for CONFIG_LBDAF is supposed to be to
> > allow 64 bit offsets for block devices on 32 bit. It sounds like
> > there's somewhere not using sector_t ... or using it wrongly which needs
> > fixing.
>
> The page cache uses unsigned long as a page index. Therefore, if unsigned
> long is 32-bit, the block device may have at most 2^32-1 pages.
Um, that's the index into the mapping, not the device; a device can have
multiple mappings and each mapping has a radix tree of pages. For most
filesystems a mapping is equivalent to a file, so we can have large
filesystems, but they can't have files over actually 4GB on 32 bits
otherwise mmap fails.
Are we running into a problems with struct address_space where we've
assumed the inode belongs to the file and lvm is doing something where
it's the whole device?
> > > On 32-bit architectures, we must limit block device size to
> > > PAGE_SIZE*(2^32-1).
> >
> > So you're saying CONFIG_LBDAF can never work, why?
> >
> > James
>
> CONFIG_LBDAF works, but it doesn't allow unlimited capacity: on x86,
> without CONFIG_LBDAF, the limit is 2TiB. With CONFIG_LBDAF, the limit is
> 16TiB (4096*2^32).
I don't think the people who did the large block device work expected to
gain only 3 bits for all their pain.
James
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/