linux-ext4 - Confused by journaling code in ext3_new

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <d9885f0f0801230107h6994847fg96d07198011b2065@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 23 Jan 2008 04:07:49 -0500
From:	"Abhishek Rai" <abhishekrai@...gle.com>
To:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Confused by journaling code in ext3_new_blocks()

Hi,

I have the following question related to the journaling code in
ext3_new_blocks() function of fs/ext3/balloc.c, any help in this
regard will be greatly appreciated. The code snippet below is taken
from 2.6.24-rc8-mm1 but this code has changed little for a long time
so it's likely that any other recent kernel will also have very
similar code.

ext3_new_blocks()
-> ext3_try_to_allocate_with_rsv()
    -> ext3_journal_dirty_metadata(handle, bitmap_bh)
...
allocated:
if ( /*sanity checking of newly allocated block numbers*/) {
    ext3_error(...);
    goto out;
}

out:
    ...
    brelse(bitmap_bh);
    return 0;

In the above code snippet, ext3_try_to_allocate_with_rsv() is marking
bitmap_bh as dirty metadata _before_ the sanity checks. I'm not
worried about the sanity checks as such, but it seems to me that if
the checks were to fail, we'd be committing the bitmap_bh updates to
disk even though it violates metadata sanity, or am I missing
something here ?

Thanks,
Abhishek
-
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