linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4 inode destroy

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

Message-ID: <141922.1483225153@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date:   Sat, 31 Dec 2016 17:59:13 -0500
From:   Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:     yi zhang <yi.zhang@...wei.com>
Cc:     linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, tytso@....edu,
        adilger.kernel@...ger.ca
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4 inode destroy

On Mon, 26 Dec 2016 20:34:17 +0800, yi zhang said:
> Because of the disk and hardware issue, the ext4 filesystem have
> many errors, the inode->i_nlink of ext4 becomes zero abnormally
> but the dentry is still positive, it will cause memory corruption
> after the following process:
>
>  1) Due to the inode->i_nlink is 0, this inode will be added into
> the orhpan list,

> +	if (WARN(inode->i_nlink == 0, "inode %lu nlink"
> +		" is already 0", inode->i_ino))

Can we get the filesystem? Or at least the device major/minor? If a system
has multiple large ext4 filesystems, it would be helpful to know which
one is having the problem.

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped