linux-ext4 - Re: Possible regression in e2fsprogs-1.43.4 [RESOLVED]

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-Id: <F43FD2C9-608B-4D5E-A61A-749993688E61@illumenos.com>
Date:   Sun, 25 Jun 2017 20:16:39 +0200
From:   Felipe A Rodriguez <far@...umenos.com>
To:     Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Christian Hesse <list@...rm.de>
Cc:     The development of GNU GRUB <grub-devel@....org>,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Possible regression in e2fsprogs-1.43.4  [RESOLVED]

On Jun 24, 2017, at 9:08 PM, Felipe A Rodriguez <far@...umenos.com> wrote:

> On Jun 23, 2017, at 11:29 PM, Christian Hesse <list@...rm.de> wrote:
> 
>> Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> on Fri, 2017/06/23 15:53:
>>> +grub-devel
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 04:00:20PM +0200, Felipe A Rodriguez wrote:
>>>> Upgrading from e2fsprogs-1.42.13 to e2fsprogs-1.43.4 causes the boot
>>>> loader to fail (unknown filesystem error) on the x86_64 VM I use for
>>>> initial testing.  I traced the problem to changes in the e2fsprogs
>>>> configuration file which now sets 64 bit flags.  I tried upgrading
>>>> to GRUB 2.02 but that did not resolve the problem.  Reverting the
>>>> changes per the patch below fixes the problem.  
>>> 
>>> Hmm, my laptop has been using a file system with the 64-bit feature
>>> enabled for quite some time, and my Debian Stretch system has been
>>> using Grub 2.02 to boot my system without any difficulties.
>>> 
>>> I've done a quick check of the Debian patches and none of them seem to
>>> modify Grub's ext2/ext4 file system implementation.  So I don't know
>>> what to tell you.  Are you sure you properly reinstalled grub on the
>>> boot device after you upgraded to grub 2.02?
>> 
> 
> Yes.  I did not upgrade the test VM directly.  I replaced GRUB 2.00 with 2.02 in my build automation which creates an installer ISO.  Installation onto the VM is also largely automated.  GRUB 2.02 (and 2.00) work fine if I revert the config file to that in 1.42.13.  
> 
> To be clear:  I don’t believe any of the code changes between 1.42.13 and 1.43.4 cause this issue.  The problem arises from just the changes in the built-in default configuration file that gets installed.  A distro that uses its own custom configuration file may not encounter this issue.   
> 
> 
>> Grub should be fine, however syslinux still suffers issues with 64-bit
>> feature. Possibly you use a chain to load syslinux first, grub second?
> 
> Yes, my test VM is configured to chain load GRUB from Syslinux (ISOLINUX).  I don’t recall whether I tried booting directly into GRUB so I will test that tomorrow.
> 

Sysllinux chain-loading is not a factor (GRUB 2.00 still fails to boot w/o it).  GRUB 2.02 does resolve the issue.  The command line for 2.02 required a “-p” switch which 2.00 does not.  This probably caused an uncaught and unnoticed failure during installation in my previous testing.


Regards,

Felipe




Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (1086 bytes)