Re: [PATCH] bcache: enhancing the security of dirty data writeback
Kent Overstreet <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-bcache,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <wxyamy7fkf7of4olnvqju2ldflnpj3k5u6qsufvesb3mtoaxwb@fuu5brsbgjwf> |
On Fri, Aug 01, 2025 at 11:30:43AM +0800, Zhou Jifeng wrote: > On Fri, 1 Aug 2025 at 10:37, Kent Overstreet <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 01, 2025 at 10:27:21AM +0800, Zhou Jifeng wrote: > > > In the writeback mode, the current bcache code uses the > > > REQ_OP_WRITE operation to handle dirty data, and clears the bkey > > > dirty flag in the btree during the bio completion callback. I think > > > there might be a potential risk: if in the event of an unexpected > > > power outage, the data in the HDD hardware cache may not have > > > had time to be persisted, then the data in the HDD hardware cache > > > that is pending processing may be lost. Since at this time the bkey > > > dirty flag in the btree has been cleared, the data status recorded > > > by the bkey does not match the actual situation of the SSD and > > > HDD. > > > Am I understanding this correctly? > > > > For what you're describing, we need to make sure the backing device is > > flushed when we're flushing the journal. > > > > It's possible that this isn't handled correctly in bcache; bcachefs > > does, and I wrote that code after bcache - but the bcache version would > > look quite different. > > > > You've read that code more recently than I have - have you checked for > > that? > > In the `write_dirty_finish` function, there is an attempt to update the > `bkey` status, but I did not observe any logging writing process. In the > core function `journal_write_unlocked` of bcache for writing logs, I > also couldn't find the code logic for sending a FLUSH command to the > backend HDD. The right place for it would be in the journal code: before doing a journal write, issue flushes to the backing devices. Can you check for that?