linux-ext4 - [PATCH] ext4: fix xfstest generic/269 double revoked buffer bug

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]

Date:	Thu, 15 Oct 2015 09:23:18 +0900
From:	Daeho Jeong <daeho.jeong@...sung.com>
To:	tytso@....edu, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Daeho Jeong <daeho.jeong@...sung.com>
Subject: [PATCH] ext4: fix xfstest generic/269 double revoked buffer bug

When you repeatly execute xfstest generic/269 with bigalloc_1k option
enabled using the below command:

"./kvm-xfstests -c bigalloc_1k -m nodelalloc -C 1000 generic/269"

you can easily see the below bug message.

"JBD2 unexpected failure: jbd2_journal_revoke: !buffer_revoked(bh);"

This means that an already revoked buffer is erroneously revoked again
and it is caused by doing revoke for the buffer at the wrong position
in ext4_free_blocks(). We need to re-position the buffer revoke
procedure for an unspecified buffer after checking the cluster boundary
for bigalloc option. If not, some part of the cluster can be doubly
revoked.

Signed-off-by: Daeho Jeong <daeho.jeong@...sung.com>
---
 fs/ext4/mballoc.c |   33 ++++++++++++++++++---------------
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
index 34b610e..abea276 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
@@ -4682,22 +4682,11 @@ void ext4_free_blocks(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode,
 	ext4_debug("freeing block %llu\n", block);
 	trace_ext4_free_blocks(inode, block, count, flags);
 
-	if (flags & EXT4_FREE_BLOCKS_FORGET) {
-		struct buffer_head *tbh = bh;
-		int i;
-
-		BUG_ON(bh && (count > 1));
+	if (bh && (flags & EXT4_FREE_BLOCKS_FORGET)) {
+		BUG_ON(count > 1);
 
-		for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
-			cond_resched();
-			if (!bh)
-				tbh = sb_find_get_block(inode->i_sb,
-							block + i);
-			if (!tbh)
-				continue;
-			ext4_forget(handle, flags & EXT4_FREE_BLOCKS_METADATA,
-				    inode, tbh, block + i);
-		}
+		ext4_forget(handle, flags & EXT4_FREE_BLOCKS_METADATA,
+			    inode, bh, block);
 	}
 
 	/*
@@ -4742,6 +4731,20 @@ void ext4_free_blocks(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode,
 			count += sbi->s_cluster_ratio - overflow;
 	}
 
+	if (!bh && (flags & EXT4_FREE_BLOCKS_FORGET)) {
+		int i;
+
+		for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
+			cond_resched();
+			bh = sb_find_get_block(inode->i_sb,
+					       block + i);
+			if (!bh)
+				continue;
+			ext4_forget(handle, flags & EXT4_FREE_BLOCKS_METADATA,
+				    inode, bh, block + i);
+		}
+	}
+
 do_more:
 	overflow = 0;
 	ext4_get_group_no_and_offset(sb, block, &block_group, &bit);
-- 
1.7.9.5

--
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