linux-ext4 - Re: s390x: kernel BUG at fs/ext4/inode.c:1591! (powerpc too!)

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

Message-ID: <515C5E4D.3090403@gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 04 Apr 2013 00:52:29 +0800
From:	Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@...il.com>
To:	Christian Kujau <lists@...dbynature.de>
CC:	Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org>,
	CAI Qian <caiqian@...hat.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
	Steve Best <sbest@...hat.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: s390x: kernel BUG at fs/ext4/inode.c:1591! (powerpc too!)

On 04/04/2013 12:46 AM, Christian Kujau wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 at 15:02, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
>> Good news big endian cpu owners
>> Please try following patches(second is most important):
>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/233396/
>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/233397/
>> I hope this should fix all known issues
> 
> Zheng Liu also sent a patch:
> 
>   [PATCH] ext4: fix a big-endian bug when an extent is zeroed out
> 
> When I try to apply all three of those to 3.9-4c4, the 2nd one from Dmitry 
> fails:
> 
> $ cat ~/dev/002-ext4_fix-cpu_vs_disk-conversions.diff | patch --dry-run -p1
> patching file fs/ext4/extents.c
> Hunk #2 FAILED at 2999.
> Hunk #3 FAILED at 3272.
> Hunk #4 FAILED at 4639.
> 3 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/ext4/extents.c.rej
> patching file fs/ext4/indirect.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1539 (offset 215 lines).
> patching file fs/ext4/inode.c
> patching file fs/ext4/mmp.c
> patching file fs/ext4/namei.c
> patching file fs/ext4/super.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1951 (offset -3 lines).
> patching file fs/ext4/xattr.c
> patching file include/trace/events/ext4.h
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1956 (offset 8 lines).
> Hunk #2 succeeded at 2060 (offset 8 lines).
> Hunk #3 succeeded at 2079 (offset 8 lines).
> 
> With only Dimitry's patchesm this happens, to -rc4:
> 
> $ cat ~/dev/001-ext4_fix-usless-declarations.diff | patch -p1
> patching file fs/ext4/ialloc.c
> patching file fs/ext4/ioctl.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 359 (offset 4 lines).
> patching file fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> patching file fs/ext4/move_extent.c
> 
> $ cat ~/dev/002-ext4_fix-cpu_vs_disk-conversions.diff | patch --dry-run -p1
> patching file fs/ext4/extents.c
> Hunk #4 FAILED at 4639.
> 1 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/ext4/extents.c.rej
> patching file fs/ext4/indirect.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1539 (offset 215 lines).
> patching file fs/ext4/inode.c
> patching file fs/ext4/mmp.c
> patching file fs/ext4/namei.c
> patching file fs/ext4/super.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1951 (offset -3 lines).
> patching file fs/ext4/xattr.c
> patching file include/trace/events/ext4.h
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1956 (offset 8 lines).
> Hunk #2 succeeded at 2060 (offset 8 lines).
> Hunk #3 succeeded at 2079 (offset 8 lines).

I guess that is because Dmitry's patch is against dev branch of ext4
tree.  Please applied my patch.  I think it could fix the bug.  That
would be great if you could give this patch a try [1].

1. http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/233555/

Thanks,
						- Zheng
--
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