| Message ID | 20220305122527.1102109-1-xiubli@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v5] ceph: do not dencrypt the dentry name twice for readdir | expand |
xiubli@redhat.com writes: > From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> > > For the readdir request the dentries will be pasred and dencrypted > in ceph_readdir_prepopulate(). And in ceph_readdir() we could just > get the dentry name from the dentry cache instead of parsing and > dencrypting them again. This could improve performance. > > Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> > --- > > V5: > - fix typo of CEPH_ENCRYPTED_LONG_SNAP_NAME_MAX macro > - release the rde->dentry in destroy_reply_info > > > fs/ceph/crypto.h | 8 ++++++ > fs/ceph/dir.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- > fs/ceph/inode.c | 7 ++++++ > fs/ceph/mds_client.c | 2 ++ > fs/ceph/mds_client.h | 1 + > 5 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/ceph/crypto.h b/fs/ceph/crypto.h > index 1e08f8a64ad6..c85cb8c8bd79 100644 > --- a/fs/ceph/crypto.h > +++ b/fs/ceph/crypto.h > @@ -83,6 +83,14 @@ static inline u32 ceph_fscrypt_auth_len(struct ceph_fscrypt_auth *fa) > */ > #define CEPH_NOHASH_NAME_MAX (189 - SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE) > > +/* > + * The encrypted long snap name will be in format of > + * "_${ENCRYPTED-LONG-SNAP-NAME}_${INODE-NUM}". And will set the max longth > + * to sizeof('_') + NAME_MAX + sizeof('_') + max of sizeof(${INO}) + extra 7 > + * bytes to align the total size to 8 bytes. > + */ > +#define CEPH_ENCRYPTED_LONG_SNAP_NAME_MAX (1 + 255 + 1 + 16 + 7) > + I think this constant needs to be defined in a different way and we need to keep the snapshots names length a bit shorter than NAME_MAX. And I'm not talking just about the encrypted snapshots. Right now, ceph PR#45192 fixes an MDS limitation that is keeping long snapshot names smaller than 80 characters. With this limitation we would need to keep the snapshot names < 64: '_' + <name> + '_' + '<inode#>' '\0' 1 + 64 + 1 + 12 + 1 = 80 Note however that currently clients *do* allow to create snapshots with bigger names. And if we do that we'll get an error when doing an LSSNAP on a .snap subdirectory that will contain the corresponding long name: # mkdir a/.snap/123456qwertasdfgzxcvb7890yuiophjklnm123456qwertasdfgzxcvb78912345 # ls -li a/b/.snap ls: a/b/.snap/_123456qwertasdfgzxcvb7890yuiophjklnm123456qwertasdfgzxcvb78912345_109951162777: No such file or directory We can limit the snapshot names on creation, but this should probably be handled on the MDS side (so that old clients won't break anything). Does this make sense? I can work on an MDS patch for this but... to which length should names be limited? NAME_MAX - (2*'_' + <inode len>)? Or should we take base64-encoded names already into account? (Sorry, I'm jumping around between PRs and patches, and trying to make any sense out of the snapshots code :-/ ) Cheers,
On 3/9/22 1:47 AM, Luís Henriques wrote: > xiubli@redhat.com writes: > >> From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >> >> For the readdir request the dentries will be pasred and dencrypted >> in ceph_readdir_prepopulate(). And in ceph_readdir() we could just >> get the dentry name from the dentry cache instead of parsing and >> dencrypting them again. This could improve performance. >> >> Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >> --- >> >> V5: >> - fix typo of CEPH_ENCRYPTED_LONG_SNAP_NAME_MAX macro >> - release the rde->dentry in destroy_reply_info >> >> >> fs/ceph/crypto.h | 8 ++++++ >> fs/ceph/dir.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- >> fs/ceph/inode.c | 7 ++++++ >> fs/ceph/mds_client.c | 2 ++ >> fs/ceph/mds_client.h | 1 + >> 5 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/ceph/crypto.h b/fs/ceph/crypto.h >> index 1e08f8a64ad6..c85cb8c8bd79 100644 >> --- a/fs/ceph/crypto.h >> +++ b/fs/ceph/crypto.h >> @@ -83,6 +83,14 @@ static inline u32 ceph_fscrypt_auth_len(struct ceph_fscrypt_auth *fa) >> */ >> #define CEPH_NOHASH_NAME_MAX (189 - SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE) >> >> +/* >> + * The encrypted long snap name will be in format of >> + * "_${ENCRYPTED-LONG-SNAP-NAME}_${INODE-NUM}". And will set the max longth >> + * to sizeof('_') + NAME_MAX + sizeof('_') + max of sizeof(${INO}) + extra 7 >> + * bytes to align the total size to 8 bytes. >> + */ >> +#define CEPH_ENCRYPTED_LONG_SNAP_NAME_MAX (1 + 255 + 1 + 16 + 7) >> + > I think this constant needs to be defined in a different way and we need > to keep the snapshots names length a bit shorter than NAME_MAX. And I'm > not talking just about the encrypted snapshots. > > Right now, ceph PR#45192 fixes an MDS limitation that is keeping long > snapshot names smaller than 80 characters. With this limitation we would > need to keep the snapshot names < 64: > > '_' + <name> + '_' + '<inode#>' '\0' > 1 + 64 + 1 + 12 + 1 = 80 > > Note however that currently clients *do* allow to create snapshots with > bigger names. And if we do that we'll get an error when doing an LSSNAP > on a .snap subdirectory that will contain the corresponding long name: > > # mkdir a/.snap/123456qwertasdfgzxcvb7890yuiophjklnm123456qwertasdfgzxcvb78912345 > # ls -li a/b/.snap > ls: a/b/.snap/_123456qwertasdfgzxcvb7890yuiophjklnm123456qwertasdfgzxcvb78912345_109951162777: No such file or directory > > We can limit the snapshot names on creation, but this should probably be > handled on the MDS side (so that old clients won't break anything). Does > this make sense? I can work on an MDS patch for this but... to which > length should names be limited? NAME_MAX - (2*'_' + <inode len>)? Or > should we take base64-encoded names already into account? > > (Sorry, I'm jumping around between PRs and patches, and trying to make any > sense out of the snapshots code :-/ ) For fscrypt case I think it's okay, because the max len of the encrypted name will be 189 bytes, so even plusing the extra 2 * sizeof('_') - sizeof(<inode#>) == 15 bytes with ceph PR#41592 it should work well. But for none fscrypt case, we must limit the max len to NAME_MAX - 2 * sizeof('_') - sizeof(<inode#>) == 255 - 2 - 13 == 240. So fixing this in MDS side makes sense IMO. - Xiubo > Cheers,
Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> writes: > On 3/9/22 1:47 AM, Luís Henriques wrote: >> xiubli@redhat.com writes: >> >>> From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >>> >>> For the readdir request the dentries will be pasred and dencrypted >>> in ceph_readdir_prepopulate(). And in ceph_readdir() we could just >>> get the dentry name from the dentry cache instead of parsing and >>> dencrypting them again. This could improve performance. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> >>> V5: >>> - fix typo of CEPH_ENCRYPTED_LONG_SNAP_NAME_MAX macro >>> - release the rde->dentry in destroy_reply_info >>> >>> >>> fs/ceph/crypto.h | 8 ++++++ >>> fs/ceph/dir.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- >>> fs/ceph/inode.c | 7 ++++++ >>> fs/ceph/mds_client.c | 2 ++ >>> fs/ceph/mds_client.h | 1 + >>> 5 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/fs/ceph/crypto.h b/fs/ceph/crypto.h >>> index 1e08f8a64ad6..c85cb8c8bd79 100644 >>> --- a/fs/ceph/crypto.h >>> +++ b/fs/ceph/crypto.h >>> @@ -83,6 +83,14 @@ static inline u32 ceph_fscrypt_auth_len(struct ceph_fscrypt_auth *fa) >>> */ >>> #define CEPH_NOHASH_NAME_MAX (189 - SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE) >>> +/* >>> + * The encrypted long snap name will be in format of >>> + * "_${ENCRYPTED-LONG-SNAP-NAME}_${INODE-NUM}". And will set the max longth >>> + * to sizeof('_') + NAME_MAX + sizeof('_') + max of sizeof(${INO}) + extra 7 >>> + * bytes to align the total size to 8 bytes. >>> + */ >>> +#define CEPH_ENCRYPTED_LONG_SNAP_NAME_MAX (1 + 255 + 1 + 16 + 7) >>> + >> I think this constant needs to be defined in a different way and we need >> to keep the snapshots names length a bit shorter than NAME_MAX. And I'm >> not talking just about the encrypted snapshots. >> >> Right now, ceph PR#45192 fixes an MDS limitation that is keeping long >> snapshot names smaller than 80 characters. With this limitation we would >> need to keep the snapshot names < 64: >> >> '_' + <name> + '_' + '<inode#>' '\0' >> 1 + 64 + 1 + 12 + 1 = 80 >> >> Note however that currently clients *do* allow to create snapshots with >> bigger names. And if we do that we'll get an error when doing an LSSNAP >> on a .snap subdirectory that will contain the corresponding long name: >> >> # mkdir a/.snap/123456qwertasdfgzxcvb7890yuiophjklnm123456qwertasdfgzxcvb78912345 >> # ls -li a/b/.snap >> ls: a/b/.snap/_123456qwertasdfgzxcvb7890yuiophjklnm123456qwertasdfgzxcvb78912345_109951162777: No such file or directory >> >> We can limit the snapshot names on creation, but this should probably be >> handled on the MDS side (so that old clients won't break anything). Does >> this make sense? I can work on an MDS patch for this but... to which >> length should names be limited? NAME_MAX - (2*'_' + <inode len>)? Or >> should we take base64-encoded names already into account? >> >> (Sorry, I'm jumping around between PRs and patches, and trying to make any >> sense out of the snapshots code :-/ ) > > For fscrypt case I think it's okay, because the max len of the encrypted name > will be 189 bytes, so even plusing the extra 2 * sizeof('_') - sizeof(<inode#>) > == 15 bytes with ceph PR#41592 it should work well. Is it really 189 bytes, or 252, which is the result of base64 encoding 189 bytes? Reading the documentation in the CEPH_NOHASH_NAME_MAX definition it seems to be 252. And in that case we need to limit the names length even further. > > But for none fscrypt case, we must limit the max len to NAME_MAX - 2 * > sizeof('_') - sizeof(<inode#>) == 255 - 2 - 13 == 240. So fixing this in > MDS side makes sense IMO. Yeah, I suppose this makes sense. I can send out a PR soon with this, and try to document it somewhere. But it may make sense to merge both PRs at the same time and *backport* them to older releases. Cheers,
On 3/9/22 5:57 PM, Luís Henriques wrote: > Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> writes: > >> On 3/9/22 1:47 AM, Luís Henriques wrote: >>> xiubli@redhat.com writes: >>> >>>> From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >>>> >>>> For the readdir request the dentries will be pasred and dencrypted >>>> in ceph_readdir_prepopulate(). And in ceph_readdir() we could just >>>> get the dentry name from the dentry cache instead of parsing and >>>> dencrypting them again. This could improve performance. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> V5: >>>> - fix typo of CEPH_ENCRYPTED_LONG_SNAP_NAME_MAX macro >>>> - release the rde->dentry in destroy_reply_info >>>> >>>> >>>> fs/ceph/crypto.h | 8 ++++++ >>>> fs/ceph/dir.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- >>>> fs/ceph/inode.c | 7 ++++++ >>>> fs/ceph/mds_client.c | 2 ++ >>>> fs/ceph/mds_client.h | 1 + >>>> 5 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/fs/ceph/crypto.h b/fs/ceph/crypto.h >>>> index 1e08f8a64ad6..c85cb8c8bd79 100644 >>>> --- a/fs/ceph/crypto.h >>>> +++ b/fs/ceph/crypto.h >>>> @@ -83,6 +83,14 @@ static inline u32 ceph_fscrypt_auth_len(struct ceph_fscrypt_auth *fa) >>>> */ >>>> #define CEPH_NOHASH_NAME_MAX (189 - SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE) >>>> +/* >>>> + * The encrypted long snap name will be in format of >>>> + * "_${ENCRYPTED-LONG-SNAP-NAME}_${INODE-NUM}". And will set the max longth >>>> + * to sizeof('_') + NAME_MAX + sizeof('_') + max of sizeof(${INO}) + extra 7 >>>> + * bytes to align the total size to 8 bytes. >>>> + */ >>>> +#define CEPH_ENCRYPTED_LONG_SNAP_NAME_MAX (1 + 255 + 1 + 16 + 7) >>>> + >>> I think this constant needs to be defined in a different way and we need >>> to keep the snapshots names length a bit shorter than NAME_MAX. And I'm >>> not talking just about the encrypted snapshots. >>> >>> Right now, ceph PR#45192 fixes an MDS limitation that is keeping long >>> snapshot names smaller than 80 characters. With this limitation we would >>> need to keep the snapshot names < 64: >>> >>> '_' + <name> + '_' + '<inode#>' '\0' >>> 1 + 64 + 1 + 12 + 1 = 80 >>> >>> Note however that currently clients *do* allow to create snapshots with >>> bigger names. And if we do that we'll get an error when doing an LSSNAP >>> on a .snap subdirectory that will contain the corresponding long name: >>> >>> # mkdir a/.snap/123456qwertasdfgzxcvb7890yuiophjklnm123456qwertasdfgzxcvb78912345 >>> # ls -li a/b/.snap >>> ls: a/b/.snap/_123456qwertasdfgzxcvb7890yuiophjklnm123456qwertasdfgzxcvb78912345_109951162777: No such file or directory >>> >>> We can limit the snapshot names on creation, but this should probably be >>> handled on the MDS side (so that old clients won't break anything). Does >>> this make sense? I can work on an MDS patch for this but... to which >>> length should names be limited? NAME_MAX - (2*'_' + <inode len>)? Or >>> should we take base64-encoded names already into account? >>> >>> (Sorry, I'm jumping around between PRs and patches, and trying to make any >>> sense out of the snapshots code :-/ ) >> For fscrypt case I think it's okay, because the max len of the encrypted name >> will be 189 bytes, so even plusing the extra 2 * sizeof('_') - sizeof(<inode#>) >> == 15 bytes with ceph PR#41592 it should work well. > Is it really 189 bytes, or 252, which is the result of base64 encoding 189 > bytes? Yeah, you are right, I misread that. The 252 is from 189 * 4 / 3, which will be the base64 encoded name. So, I think you should fix this to make the totally of base64 encode name won't bigger than 240 = 255 - 15. So the CEPH_NOHASH_NAME_MAX should be: #define CEPH_NOHASH_NAME_MAX (180 - SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE) ? > Reading the documentation in the CEPH_NOHASH_NAME_MAX definition > it seems to be 252. And in that case we need to limit the names length > even further. > >> But for none fscrypt case, we must limit the max len to NAME_MAX - 2 * >> sizeof('_') - sizeof(<inode#>) == 255 - 2 - 13 == 240. So fixing this in >> MDS side makes sense IMO. > Yeah, I suppose this makes sense. I can send out a PR soon with this, and > try to document it somewhere. But it may make sense to merge both PRs at > the same time and *backport* them to older releases. Yeah, make sense. - Xiubo > Cheers,
On 3/9/22 5:57 PM, Luís Henriques wrote: > Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> writes: > >> On 3/9/22 1:47 AM, Luís Henriques wrote: >>> xiubli@redhat.com writes: >>> >>>> From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >>>> >>>> For the readdir request the dentries will be pasred and dencrypted >>>> in ceph_readdir_prepopulate(). And in ceph_readdir() we could just >>>> get the dentry name from the dentry cache instead of parsing and >>>> dencrypting them again. This could improve performance. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> V5: >>>> - fix typo of CEPH_ENCRYPTED_LONG_SNAP_NAME_MAX macro >>>> - release the rde->dentry in destroy_reply_info >>>> >>>> >>>> fs/ceph/crypto.h | 8 ++++++ >>>> fs/ceph/dir.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- >>>> fs/ceph/inode.c | 7 ++++++ >>>> fs/ceph/mds_client.c | 2 ++ >>>> fs/ceph/mds_client.h | 1 + >>>> 5 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/fs/ceph/crypto.h b/fs/ceph/crypto.h >>>> index 1e08f8a64ad6..c85cb8c8bd79 100644 >>>> --- a/fs/ceph/crypto.h >>>> +++ b/fs/ceph/crypto.h >>>> @@ -83,6 +83,14 @@ static inline u32 ceph_fscrypt_auth_len(struct ceph_fscrypt_auth *fa) >>>> */ >>>> #define CEPH_NOHASH_NAME_MAX (189 - SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE) >>>> +/* >>>> + * The encrypted long snap name will be in format of >>>> + * "_${ENCRYPTED-LONG-SNAP-NAME}_${INODE-NUM}". And will set the max longth >>>> + * to sizeof('_') + NAME_MAX + sizeof('_') + max of sizeof(${INO}) + extra 7 >>>> + * bytes to align the total size to 8 bytes. >>>> + */ >>>> +#define CEPH_ENCRYPTED_LONG_SNAP_NAME_MAX (1 + 255 + 1 + 16 + 7) >>>> + So for this the max length of the long snap name shouldn't exceed NAME_MAX in both cases, I will remove this macro and use NAME_MAX directly instead. - Xiubo >>> I think this constant needs to be defined in a different way and we need >>> to keep the snapshots names length a bit shorter than NAME_MAX. And I'm >>> not talking just about the encrypted snapshots. >>> >>> Right now, ceph PR#45192 fixes an MDS limitation that is keeping long >>> snapshot names smaller than 80 characters. With this limitation we would >>> need to keep the snapshot names < 64: >>> >>> '_' + <name> + '_' + '<inode#>' '\0' >>> 1 + 64 + 1 + 12 + 1 = 80 >>> >>> Note however that currently clients *do* allow to create snapshots with >>> bigger names. And if we do that we'll get an error when doing an LSSNAP >>> on a .snap subdirectory that will contain the corresponding long name: >>> >>> # mkdir a/.snap/123456qwertasdfgzxcvb7890yuiophjklnm123456qwertasdfgzxcvb78912345 >>> # ls -li a/b/.snap >>> ls: a/b/.snap/_123456qwertasdfgzxcvb7890yuiophjklnm123456qwertasdfgzxcvb78912345_109951162777: No such file or directory >>> >>> We can limit the snapshot names on creation, but this should probably be >>> handled on the MDS side (so that old clients won't break anything). Does >>> this make sense? I can work on an MDS patch for this but... to which >>> length should names be limited? NAME_MAX - (2*'_' + <inode len>)? Or >>> should we take base64-encoded names already into account? >>> >>> (Sorry, I'm jumping around between PRs and patches, and trying to make any >>> sense out of the snapshots code :-/ ) >> For fscrypt case I think it's okay, because the max len of the encrypted name >> will be 189 bytes, so even plusing the extra 2 * sizeof('_') - sizeof(<inode#>) >> == 15 bytes with ceph PR#41592 it should work well. > Is it really 189 bytes, or 252, which is the result of base64 encoding 189 > bytes? Reading the documentation in the CEPH_NOHASH_NAME_MAX definition > it seems to be 252. And in that case we need to limit the names length > even further. > >> But for none fscrypt case, we must limit the max len to NAME_MAX - 2 * >> sizeof('_') - sizeof(<inode#>) == 255 - 2 - 13 == 240. So fixing this in >> MDS side makes sense IMO. > Yeah, I suppose this makes sense. I can send out a PR soon with this, and > try to document it somewhere. But it may make sense to merge both PRs at > the same time and *backport* them to older releases. > > Cheers,
Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> writes: > On 3/9/22 5:57 PM, Luís Henriques wrote: >> Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> writes: >> >>> On 3/9/22 1:47 AM, Luís Henriques wrote: >>>> xiubli@redhat.com writes: >>>> >>>>> From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >>>>> >>>>> For the readdir request the dentries will be pasred and dencrypted >>>>> in ceph_readdir_prepopulate(). And in ceph_readdir() we could just >>>>> get the dentry name from the dentry cache instead of parsing and >>>>> dencrypting them again. This could improve performance. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> >>>>> V5: >>>>> - fix typo of CEPH_ENCRYPTED_LONG_SNAP_NAME_MAX macro >>>>> - release the rde->dentry in destroy_reply_info >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> fs/ceph/crypto.h | 8 ++++++ >>>>> fs/ceph/dir.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- >>>>> fs/ceph/inode.c | 7 ++++++ >>>>> fs/ceph/mds_client.c | 2 ++ >>>>> fs/ceph/mds_client.h | 1 + >>>>> 5 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/fs/ceph/crypto.h b/fs/ceph/crypto.h >>>>> index 1e08f8a64ad6..c85cb8c8bd79 100644 >>>>> --- a/fs/ceph/crypto.h >>>>> +++ b/fs/ceph/crypto.h >>>>> @@ -83,6 +83,14 @@ static inline u32 ceph_fscrypt_auth_len(struct ceph_fscrypt_auth *fa) >>>>> */ >>>>> #define CEPH_NOHASH_NAME_MAX (189 - SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE) >>>>> +/* >>>>> + * The encrypted long snap name will be in format of >>>>> + * "_${ENCRYPTED-LONG-SNAP-NAME}_${INODE-NUM}". And will set the max longth >>>>> + * to sizeof('_') + NAME_MAX + sizeof('_') + max of sizeof(${INO}) + extra 7 >>>>> + * bytes to align the total size to 8 bytes. >>>>> + */ >>>>> +#define CEPH_ENCRYPTED_LONG_SNAP_NAME_MAX (1 + 255 + 1 + 16 + 7) >>>>> + >>>> I think this constant needs to be defined in a different way and we need >>>> to keep the snapshots names length a bit shorter than NAME_MAX. And I'm >>>> not talking just about the encrypted snapshots. >>>> >>>> Right now, ceph PR#45192 fixes an MDS limitation that is keeping long >>>> snapshot names smaller than 80 characters. With this limitation we would >>>> need to keep the snapshot names < 64: >>>> >>>> '_' + <name> + '_' + '<inode#>' '\0' >>>> 1 + 64 + 1 + 12 + 1 = 80 >>>> >>>> Note however that currently clients *do* allow to create snapshots with >>>> bigger names. And if we do that we'll get an error when doing an LSSNAP >>>> on a .snap subdirectory that will contain the corresponding long name: >>>> >>>> # mkdir a/.snap/123456qwertasdfgzxcvb7890yuiophjklnm123456qwertasdfgzxcvb78912345 >>>> # ls -li a/b/.snap >>>> ls: a/b/.snap/_123456qwertasdfgzxcvb7890yuiophjklnm123456qwertasdfgzxcvb78912345_109951162777: No such file or directory >>>> >>>> We can limit the snapshot names on creation, but this should probably be >>>> handled on the MDS side (so that old clients won't break anything). Does >>>> this make sense? I can work on an MDS patch for this but... to which >>>> length should names be limited? NAME_MAX - (2*'_' + <inode len>)? Or >>>> should we take base64-encoded names already into account? >>>> >>>> (Sorry, I'm jumping around between PRs and patches, and trying to make any >>>> sense out of the snapshots code :-/ ) >>> For fscrypt case I think it's okay, because the max len of the encrypted name >>> will be 189 bytes, so even plusing the extra 2 * sizeof('_') - sizeof(<inode#>) >>> == 15 bytes with ceph PR#41592 it should work well. >> Is it really 189 bytes, or 252, which is the result of base64 encoding 189 >> bytes? > > Yeah, you are right, I misread that. The 252 is from 189 * 4 / 3, which will be > the base64 encoded name. > > So, I think you should fix this to make the totally of base64 encode name won't > bigger than 240 = 255 - 15. So the CEPH_NOHASH_NAME_MAX should be: > > #define CEPH_NOHASH_NAME_MAX (180 - SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE) > > ? That could be done, but maybe it's not worth it if the MDS returns -EINVAL when creating a snapshot with a name that breaks this rule. Thus, we can still have regular file with 189 bytes names and only the snapshots will have this extra limitation. (I've already created PR#45312 for this.) But I'm OK either way. Cheers,
On 3/9/22 7:58 PM, Luís Henriques wrote: > Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> writes: > >> On 3/9/22 5:57 PM, Luís Henriques wrote: >>> Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> writes: >>> >>>> On 3/9/22 1:47 AM, Luís Henriques wrote: >>>>> xiubli@redhat.com writes: >>>>> >>>>>> From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >>>>>> >>>>>> For the readdir request the dentries will be pasred and dencrypted >>>>>> in ceph_readdir_prepopulate(). And in ceph_readdir() we could just >>>>>> get the dentry name from the dentry cache instead of parsing and >>>>>> dencrypting them again. This could improve performance. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> >>>>>> V5: >>>>>> - fix typo of CEPH_ENCRYPTED_LONG_SNAP_NAME_MAX macro >>>>>> - release the rde->dentry in destroy_reply_info >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> fs/ceph/crypto.h | 8 ++++++ >>>>>> fs/ceph/dir.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- >>>>>> fs/ceph/inode.c | 7 ++++++ >>>>>> fs/ceph/mds_client.c | 2 ++ >>>>>> fs/ceph/mds_client.h | 1 + >>>>>> 5 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/fs/ceph/crypto.h b/fs/ceph/crypto.h >>>>>> index 1e08f8a64ad6..c85cb8c8bd79 100644 >>>>>> --- a/fs/ceph/crypto.h >>>>>> +++ b/fs/ceph/crypto.h >>>>>> @@ -83,6 +83,14 @@ static inline u32 ceph_fscrypt_auth_len(struct ceph_fscrypt_auth *fa) >>>>>> */ >>>>>> #define CEPH_NOHASH_NAME_MAX (189 - SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE) >>>>>> +/* >>>>>> + * The encrypted long snap name will be in format of >>>>>> + * "_${ENCRYPTED-LONG-SNAP-NAME}_${INODE-NUM}". And will set the max longth >>>>>> + * to sizeof('_') + NAME_MAX + sizeof('_') + max of sizeof(${INO}) + extra 7 >>>>>> + * bytes to align the total size to 8 bytes. >>>>>> + */ >>>>>> +#define CEPH_ENCRYPTED_LONG_SNAP_NAME_MAX (1 + 255 + 1 + 16 + 7) >>>>>> + >>>>> I think this constant needs to be defined in a different way and we need >>>>> to keep the snapshots names length a bit shorter than NAME_MAX. And I'm >>>>> not talking just about the encrypted snapshots. >>>>> >>>>> Right now, ceph PR#45192 fixes an MDS limitation that is keeping long >>>>> snapshot names smaller than 80 characters. With this limitation we would >>>>> need to keep the snapshot names < 64: >>>>> >>>>> '_' + <name> + '_' + '<inode#>' '\0' >>>>> 1 + 64 + 1 + 12 + 1 = 80 >>>>> >>>>> Note however that currently clients *do* allow to create snapshots with >>>>> bigger names. And if we do that we'll get an error when doing an LSSNAP >>>>> on a .snap subdirectory that will contain the corresponding long name: >>>>> >>>>> # mkdir a/.snap/123456qwertasdfgzxcvb7890yuiophjklnm123456qwertasdfgzxcvb78912345 >>>>> # ls -li a/b/.snap >>>>> ls: a/b/.snap/_123456qwertasdfgzxcvb7890yuiophjklnm123456qwertasdfgzxcvb78912345_109951162777: No such file or directory >>>>> >>>>> We can limit the snapshot names on creation, but this should probably be >>>>> handled on the MDS side (so that old clients won't break anything). Does >>>>> this make sense? I can work on an MDS patch for this but... to which >>>>> length should names be limited? NAME_MAX - (2*'_' + <inode len>)? Or >>>>> should we take base64-encoded names already into account? >>>>> >>>>> (Sorry, I'm jumping around between PRs and patches, and trying to make any >>>>> sense out of the snapshots code :-/ ) >>>> For fscrypt case I think it's okay, because the max len of the encrypted name >>>> will be 189 bytes, so even plusing the extra 2 * sizeof('_') - sizeof(<inode#>) >>>> == 15 bytes with ceph PR#41592 it should work well. >>> Is it really 189 bytes, or 252, which is the result of base64 encoding 189 >>> bytes? >> Yeah, you are right, I misread that. The 252 is from 189 * 4 / 3, which will be >> the base64 encoded name. >> >> So, I think you should fix this to make the totally of base64 encode name won't >> bigger than 240 = 255 - 15. So the CEPH_NOHASH_NAME_MAX should be: >> >> #define CEPH_NOHASH_NAME_MAX (180 - SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE) >> >> ? > That could be done, but maybe it's not worth it if the MDS returns -EINVAL > when creating a snapshot with a name that breaks this rule. Thus, we can > still have regular file with 189 bytes names and only the snapshots will > have this extra limitation. (I've already created PR#45312 for this.) > > But I'm OK either way. IMO your PR will always make sense no matter we will fix it in kclient side. Will leave this to Jeff :-) - Xiubo > Cheers,
diff --git a/fs/ceph/crypto.h b/fs/ceph/crypto.h index 1e08f8a64ad6..c85cb8c8bd79 100644 --- a/fs/ceph/crypto.h +++ b/fs/ceph/crypto.h @@ -83,6 +83,14 @@ static inline u32 ceph_fscrypt_auth_len(struct ceph_fscrypt_auth *fa) */ #define CEPH_NOHASH_NAME_MAX (189 - SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE) +/* + * The encrypted long snap name will be in format of + * "_${ENCRYPTED-LONG-SNAP-NAME}_${INODE-NUM}". And will set the max longth + * to sizeof('_') + NAME_MAX + sizeof('_') + max of sizeof(${INO}) + extra 7 + * bytes to align the total size to 8 bytes. + */ +#define CEPH_ENCRYPTED_LONG_SNAP_NAME_MAX (1 + 255 + 1 + 16 + 7) + void ceph_fscrypt_set_ops(struct super_block *sb); void ceph_fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(struct ceph_fs_client *fsc); diff --git a/fs/ceph/dir.c b/fs/ceph/dir.c index 6df2a91af236..b30429e2d079 100644 --- a/fs/ceph/dir.c +++ b/fs/ceph/dir.c @@ -316,8 +316,7 @@ static int ceph_readdir(struct file *file, struct dir_context *ctx) int err; unsigned frag = -1; struct ceph_mds_reply_info_parsed *rinfo; - struct fscrypt_str tname = FSTR_INIT(NULL, 0); - struct fscrypt_str oname = FSTR_INIT(NULL, 0); + char *dentry_name = NULL; dout("readdir %p file %p pos %llx\n", inode, file, ctx->pos); if (dfi->file_info.flags & CEPH_F_ATEND) @@ -369,14 +368,6 @@ static int ceph_readdir(struct file *file, struct dir_context *ctx) spin_unlock(&ci->i_ceph_lock); } - err = ceph_fname_alloc_buffer(inode, &tname); - if (err < 0) - goto out; - - err = ceph_fname_alloc_buffer(inode, &oname); - if (err < 0) - goto out; - /* proceed with a normal readdir */ more: /* do we have the correct frag content buffered? */ @@ -528,31 +519,39 @@ static int ceph_readdir(struct file *file, struct dir_context *ctx) } } } + + dentry_name = kmalloc(CEPH_ENCRYPTED_LONG_SNAP_NAME_MAX, GFP_KERNEL); + if (!dentry_name) { + err = -ENOMEM; + ceph_mdsc_put_request(dfi->last_readdir); + dfi->last_readdir = NULL; + goto out; + } + for (; i < rinfo->dir_nr; i++) { struct ceph_mds_reply_dir_entry *rde = rinfo->dir_entries + i; - struct ceph_fname fname = { .dir = inode, - .name = rde->name, - .name_len = rde->name_len, - .ctext = rde->altname, - .ctext_len = rde->altname_len }; - u32 olen = oname.len; - - err = ceph_fname_to_usr(&fname, &tname, &oname, NULL); - if (err) { - pr_err("%s unable to decode %.*s, got %d\n", __func__, - rde->name_len, rde->name, err); - goto out; - } + struct dentry *dn = rde->dentry; + int name_len; BUG_ON(rde->offset < ctx->pos); BUG_ON(!rde->inode.in); + BUG_ON(!rde->dentry); ctx->pos = rde->offset; - dout("readdir (%d/%d) -> %llx '%.*s' %p\n", - i, rinfo->dir_nr, ctx->pos, - rde->name_len, rde->name, &rde->inode.in); - if (!dir_emit(ctx, oname.name, oname.len, + spin_lock(&dn->d_lock); + memcpy(dentry_name, dn->d_name.name, dn->d_name.len); + name_len = dn->d_name.len; + spin_unlock(&dn->d_lock); + + dentry_name[name_len] = '\0'; + dout("readdir (%d/%d) -> %llx '%s' %p\n", + i, rinfo->dir_nr, ctx->pos, dentry_name, &rde->inode.in); + + dput(dn); + rde->dentry = NULL; + + if (!dir_emit(ctx, dentry_name, name_len, ceph_present_ino(inode->i_sb, le64_to_cpu(rde->inode.in->ino)), le32_to_cpu(rde->inode.in->mode) >> 12)) { /* @@ -566,8 +565,6 @@ static int ceph_readdir(struct file *file, struct dir_context *ctx) goto out; } - /* Reset the lengths to their original allocated vals */ - oname.len = olen; ctx->pos++; } @@ -625,8 +622,8 @@ static int ceph_readdir(struct file *file, struct dir_context *ctx) err = 0; dout("readdir %p file %p done.\n", inode, file); out: - ceph_fname_free_buffer(inode, &tname); - ceph_fname_free_buffer(inode, &oname); + if (dentry_name) + kfree(dentry_name); return err; } diff --git a/fs/ceph/inode.c b/fs/ceph/inode.c index e5a9838981ba..dfb7b4461857 100644 --- a/fs/ceph/inode.c +++ b/fs/ceph/inode.c @@ -1902,6 +1902,7 @@ int ceph_readdir_prepopulate(struct ceph_mds_request *req, goto out; } + rde->dentry = NULL; dname.name = oname.name; dname.len = oname.len; dname.hash = full_name_hash(parent, dname.name, dname.len); @@ -1962,6 +1963,12 @@ int ceph_readdir_prepopulate(struct ceph_mds_request *req, goto retry_lookup; } + /* + * ceph_readdir will use the dentry to get the name + * to avoid doing the dencrypt again there. + */ + rde->dentry = dget(dn); + /* inode */ if (d_really_is_positive(dn)) { in = d_inode(dn); diff --git a/fs/ceph/mds_client.c b/fs/ceph/mds_client.c index f0d2442187a3..9de749dd715c 100644 --- a/fs/ceph/mds_client.c +++ b/fs/ceph/mds_client.c @@ -733,6 +733,8 @@ static void destroy_reply_info(struct ceph_mds_reply_info_parsed *info) kfree(rde->inode.fscrypt_auth); kfree(rde->inode.fscrypt_file); + dput(rde->dentry); + rde->dentry = NULL; } free_pages((unsigned long)info->dir_entries, get_order(info->dir_buf_size)); } diff --git a/fs/ceph/mds_client.h b/fs/ceph/mds_client.h index 0dfe24f94567..663d7754d57d 100644 --- a/fs/ceph/mds_client.h +++ b/fs/ceph/mds_client.h @@ -96,6 +96,7 @@ struct ceph_mds_reply_info_in { }; struct ceph_mds_reply_dir_entry { + struct dentry *dentry; char *name; u8 *altname; u32 name_len;