linux-kernel - Re: mount stuck in infinite loop

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 14 Feb 2018 08:43:18 -0800
From:   Francesco Ruggeri <fruggeri@...sta.com>
To:     linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Francesco Ruggeri <fruggeri@...sta.com>
Subject: Re: mount stuck in infinite loop

Does anybody have any opinions about this?

Thanks,
Francesco Ruggeri

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 9:16 AM, Francesco Ruggeri <fruggeri@...sta.com> wrote:
> I had a few cases of mount getting stuck in an infinite loop.
> This happens when bdev->bd_inode->i_blkbits gets modified (for
> example by bd_set_size()) while *_fill_super() is between
> sb_min_blocksize() and sb_bread(), and the new value is inconsistent
> with the block size used in fill_super().
> When this happens one can get into an infinite loop in
> __getblk_slow(), if grow_buffers() allocates/finds a page with a
> given index, but __find_get_block{_slow}() looks for (and does not
> find) a page with a different index.
>
> I can reproduce it in 4.14.15 with the following script.
> I can also reproduce it in 4.9 and 3.18.
>
> FILE=/tmp/fsfile
> MNT=/tmp/fsmnt
> LOOP=`losetup -f`
>
> rm -rf $FILE $MNT
>
> mkdir $MNT
> dd if=/dev/zero of=$FILE count=32 bs=1MiB
> losetup $LOOP $FILE
> mkfs -t ext4 $LOOP
> while true; do losetup -D $LOOP; losetup $LOOP $FILE; done \
>         2>/dev/null >/dev/null &
> for ((i=0; i<100; i++)); do echo ================== $i; \
>         mount $LOOP $MNT; umount $MNT; done
>
> The issue is that __find_get_block_slow() and grow_buffers() compute
> the page index in different ways.
> I am not sure what the correct solution should be here.
>
> Thanks,
> Francesco Ruggeri
>