linux-ext4 - Re: [RESEND][PATCH] dir_index: error out instead of BUG on corrupt hash dir limit

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]

Message-ID: <46E55BD0.30500@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 10 Sep 2007 09:59:28 -0500
From:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
To:	Duane Griffin <duaneg@...da.com>
CC:	linux-kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH] dir_index: error out instead of BUG on corrupt
 hash dir limit

Duane Griffin wrote:
> Hi Eric,
> 
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 09:48:43PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> (resend, this one got lost?  Got an acked-by from Andreas
>> last go-round)
> 
> Sorry I missed this first time around. I came up with a very similar
> fix recently, following a gentoo bug report.  However there are a few
> more asserts later that you aren't currently handling. Below is an
> incremental patch on top of yours that converts them too. 

Ah, good point... I focused a bit too much on the single problem at hand
didn't I.  :)

> Note that one
> of them is in an if (0) block and maybe should be left alone -- what do
> you think?

If it's just there for debug, maybe leaving an assert is ok, to get a
dump & system state etc.  If it is converted, a printk would probably be
good so you know you're falling back, otherwise that extra checking is a
bit pointless if it's silent.

> I tested all the changed code paths, except the if (0) one, using a
> utility that appropriately corrupts ext3 images. 
> The source code is
> attached to the gentoo bug report here:
> 
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=183207
> 
> Signed-off-by: Duane Griffin <duaneg@...da.com>

Looks good, thanks for not ignoring the other asserts.  ;-)  I wonder if
we should fix up all the new error condition printk's a bit to be more
descriptive of the problem at hand; for example, the one I sent should
maybe say:

+		ext3_warning(dir->i_sb, __FUNCTION__,
+			     "Corrupt root limit in dir inode %ld\n", dir->i_ino);

I wanted to leave the word "corrupt" in there, or at least something to
clue in the user that maybe fsck is in order...

Thanks,
-Eric
-
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