linux-ext4 - [bug report] ext4: xattr-in-inode support

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: <20180712133019.zt65g2uh5jlf2mvp@kili.mountain>
Date:   Thu, 12 Jul 2018 16:30:19 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     andreas.dilger@...el.com
Cc:     linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [bug report] ext4: xattr-in-inode support

Hello Andreas Dilger,

The patch e50e5129f384: "ext4: xattr-in-inode support" from Jun 21,
2017, leads to the following static checker warning:

	fs/ext4/xattr.c:1393 ext4_xattr_inode_write()
	warn: 'bh' can also be NULL

fs/ext4/xattr.c
  1380          block = 0;
  1381          while (wsize < bufsize) {
  1382                  if (bh != NULL)
  1383                          brelse(bh);
  1384                  csize = (bufsize - wsize) > blocksize ? blocksize :
  1385                                                                  bufsize - wsize;
  1386                  bh = ext4_getblk(handle, ea_inode, block, 0);
  1387                  if (IS_ERR(bh))
  1388                          return PTR_ERR(bh);
  1389                  ret = ext4_journal_get_write_access(handle, bh);
  1390                  if (ret)
  1391                          goto out;
  1392  
  1393                  memcpy(bh->b_data, buf, csize);

I don't know the code well enought to say if it's an issue.  I really
wish there were comments when functions return a mix of error pointers
and NULL.

  1394                  set_buffer_uptodate(bh);
  1395                  ext4_handle_dirty_metadata(handle, ea_inode, bh);
  1396  
  1397                  buf += csize;
  1398                  wsize += csize;
  1399                  block += 1;
  1400          }

regards,
dan carpenter