| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAOiN93kvSdzsJXqbabuLDcOh2me9wzLUPBsr2UY5BgHFXrhcnA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 11:23:12 +0530
From: Ashish Sangwan <ashishsangwan2@...il.com>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
Cc: Forrest Liu <forrestl@...ology.com>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix extent tree corruption that incurred by hole punch
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 12/6/12 9:45 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> On 12/4/12 6:11 AM, Forrest Liu wrote:
>>> Extent indexes didn't update correctly in ext4_ext_rm_idx, when depth
>>> of extent tree is greater than 1.
>>
>> This is interesting; we had 2 reports of similar corruption on the
>> list, I wonder if the application in question was doing hole punching.
>> I didn't expect that they were, so TBH I was pretty much ignoring
>> the hole-punch cases for parent index updates. Hm. I'll have
>> to look into that.
>>
>> Could you turn your testcase into an xfstest regression test?
>
> Also, please note that I sent an e2fsck patch to try to fix this
> problem after the fact; it'd be great if in your testing, you could
> also confirm that e2fsck w/ my patch fixes it correctly.
>
I checked you patch.
This was the extent tree situation after removing 1st extent index:
debugfs: ex abc
Level Entries Logical Physical Length Flags
0/ 2 1/ 1 0 - 8399 32857 8400
1/ 2 1/ 4 2048 - 4081 4138 2034
2/ 2 1/339 2048 - 2053 69632 - 69637 6
2/ 2 2/339 2054 - 2059 69656 - 69661 6
E2fsck's output with your patch=>
Linux#> /dtv/usb/sdb1/e2fsck /dev/sda1 -f
e2fsck 1.42.6.1 (06-DEC-2012)
Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
Interior extent node level 0 of inode 31:
Logical start 0 does not match logical start 2048 at next level. Fix<y>? yes
Inode 31, i_blocks is 50856, should be 16280. Fix<y>? yes
Pass 2: Checking directory structure
Pass 3: Checking directory connectivity
Pass 4: Checking reference counts
Pass 5: Checking group summary information
Block bitmap differences: -4138 -(73712--73717) -73728
-(98342--98347) -(98354--98359) -(98366--98371) -(98378--98383)
-(98390--98395) -(98402--98407)
< Similarly this was huge list of around 50-60 lines, so I skip to last >
910--106915) -(106922--106927) -(106934--106939) -(106946--106951)
-(106958--106963) -(122872--122879)
Fix<y>? yes
Free blocks count wrong for group #0 (14308, counted=14309).
Fix<y>? yes
Free blocks count wrong for group #2 (12297, counted=12304).
Fix<y>? yes
Free blocks count wrong for group #3 (9770, counted=14084).
Fix<y>? yes
Free blocks count wrong (52407, counted=56729).
Fix<y>? yes
/dev/sda1: ***** FILE SYSTEM WAS MODIFIED *****
/dev/sda1: 9872/126592 files (0.1% non-contiguous), 69775/126504 blocks
Linux#>
> Thanks,
> -Eric
>
>> -Eric
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Forrest Liu <forrestl@...ology.com>
>>> ---
>>> fs/ext4/extents.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++----
>>> 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c
>>> index d3dd618..b10b8c0 100644
>>> --- a/fs/ext4/extents.c
>>> +++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c
>>> @@ -2190,13 +2190,15 @@ errout:
>>> * removes index from the index block.
>>> */
>>> static int ext4_ext_rm_idx(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode,
>>> - struct ext4_ext_path *path)
>>> + struct ext4_ext_path *path, int depth)
>>> {
>>> int err;
>>> ext4_fsblk_t leaf;
>>> + __le32 border;
>>>
>>> /* free index block */
>>> - path--;
>>> + depth--;
>>> + path = path + depth;
>>> leaf = ext4_idx_pblock(path->p_idx);
>>> if (unlikely(path->p_hdr->eh_entries == 0)) {
>>> EXT4_ERROR_INODE(inode, "path->p_hdr->eh_entries == 0");
>>> @@ -2221,6 +2223,20 @@ static int ext4_ext_rm_idx(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode,
>>>
>>> ext4_free_blocks(handle, inode, NULL, leaf, 1,
>>> EXT4_FREE_BLOCKS_METADATA | EXT4_FREE_BLOCKS_FORGET);
>>> +
>>> + border = path->p_idx->ei_block;
>>> + while (--depth >= 0) {
>>> + if (path->p_idx != EXT_FIRST_INDEX(path->p_hdr))
>>> + break;
>>> + path--;
>>> + err = ext4_ext_get_access(handle, inode, path);
>>> + if (err)
>>> + break;
>>> + path->p_idx->ei_block = border;
>>> + err = ext4_ext_dirty(handle, inode, path);
>>> + if (err)
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> return err;
>>> }
>>>
>>> @@ -2557,7 +2573,7 @@ ext4_ext_rm_leaf(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode,
>>> /* if this leaf is free, then we should
>>> * remove it from index block above */
>>> if (err == 0 && eh->eh_entries == 0 && path[depth].p_bh != NULL)
>>> - err = ext4_ext_rm_idx(handle, inode, path + depth);
>>> + err = ext4_ext_rm_idx(handle, inode, path, depth);
>>>
>>> out:
>>> return err;
>>> @@ -2760,7 +2776,7 @@ again:
>>> /* index is empty, remove it;
>>> * handle must be already prepared by the
>>> * truncatei_leaf() */
>>> - err = ext4_ext_rm_idx(handle, inode, path + i);
>>> + err = ext4_ext_rm_idx(handle, inode, path, i);
>>> }
>>> /* root level has p_bh == NULL, brelse() eats this */
>>> brelse(path[i].p_bh);
>>>
>>
>
> --
> 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
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists