linux-ext4 - Re: punch-hole should go beyond i

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:	Thu, 12 Jan 2012 16:21:30 -0800 (PST)
From:	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To:	Allison Henderson <achender@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
cc:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: punch-hole should go beyond i_size

On Thu, 12 Jan 2012, Allison Henderson wrote:
> On 01/11/2012 07:55 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 05:02:12PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > > 
> > > ext4_ext_punch_hole() contains /* No need to punch hole beyond i_size */
> > > early return, and trimming to i_size below, but forgets that the other
> > > variety of fallocate(), with FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE set, may have allocated
> > > blocks beyond i_size.  They can be removed with ftruncate(), but it is
> > > unexpected for fallocate() not to undo its own work, and xfs does so.
> > 
> > I'm pretty sure that's a bug as XFS allows punching holes in extents
> > beyond EOF.
> 
> Oh I see, I'll take a look at it, I think it will be ok to just take out the
> early return.  Thx!

Thanks.  And I've just noticed another, very easily fixed, error:
I believe those -ENOTSUPPs in ext4_punch_hole() should be -EOPNOTSUPPs.

Hugh
--
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