linux-ext4 - Re: ext3_valid_block_bitmap: Invalid block bitmap in 2.6.25rc in memory

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:17:10 +0530
From:	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>
Cc:	Mingming Cao <cmm@...ibm.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ext3_valid_block_bitmap: Invalid block bitmap in 2.6.25rc in
	memory

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 05:40:59PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Apr 14, 2008  07:50 -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
> > On Sat, 2008-04-12 at 22:57 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > FYI, a system here running various 2.6.25rc kernels (latest upto rc7-git6) 
> > > with longer uptimes suddenly decided to fsck one of its file systems
> > > due to an error after reboot.
> > > 
> > > The error causing this was:
> > > 
> > > kernel: EXT3-fs error (device dm-0): ext3_valid_block_bitmap: Invalid block bitmap - block_group = 285, block = 9338882
> > > 
> > > detected by the 2.6.25rc7-git6 kernel.
> > > 
> > > I don't see any ill effects from it and fsck didn't find anything wrong
> > > so it must have been something spurious in memory only (or fsck
> > > fails to check for this condition, but that is hard to imagine) 
> > 
> > The ext3_valid_block_bitmap() is to check whether the block or inode
> > bitmap block is marked as "used" in the block group bitmap, to prevent
> > allocating blocks from these system meta data blocks.
> 
> Right.
> 
> > The error messages seems indicating that one of the block group meta
> > data is corrupted, but I don't why fsck doesn't catch this, Andreas?
> 
> It might have been corrupted on read (e.g. bad cable, or bad/wrong
> data read from disk the first time).
> 
> The message itself isn't very useful though.  It should report what it
> thinks is wrong with the bitmap (e.g. whether block/inode bitmaps are
> unallocated, which/how many itable blocks are unallocated).
> 

debugfs should help to find these details right ?


-aneesh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html