linux-ext4 - RE: [PATCH 5/5] ext4: Fix extent merging in ext4_ext_shift_path

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: <005f01cf5a01$aa187370$fe495a50$@samsung.com>
Date:	Thu, 17 Apr 2014 14:55:41 +0900
From:	Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@...sung.com>
To:	Lukáš Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 5/5] ext4: Fix extent merging in
 ext4_ext_shift_path_extents()

> There is a bug in ext4_ext_shift_path_extents() where if we actually
> manage to merge a extent we would skip shifting the next extent. This
> will result in in one extent in the extent tree not being properly
> shifted.
> 
> This is causing failure in various xfstests tests using fsx or fsstress
> with collapse range support. It will also cause file system corruption
> which looks something like:
> 
>  e2fsck 1.42.9 (4-Feb-2014)
>  Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
>  Inode 20 has out of order extents
>         (invalid logical block 3, physical block 492938, len 2)
>  Clear? yes
>  ...
> 
> when running e2fsck.
> 
> It's also very easily reproducible just by running fsx without any
> parameters. I can usually hit the problem within a minute.
> 
> Fix it by increasing ex_start only if we're not merging the extent.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>
You can add : Reviewed-by: Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@...sung.com>

Thanks!




--
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