linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] e2fsck: remove resize inode if both resize_inode and meta

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: <20180811230430.GB23679@thunk.org>
Date:   Sat, 11 Aug 2018 19:04:30 -0400
From:   "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To:     Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] e2fsck: remove resize inode if both resize_inode and
 meta_bg are enabled

On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 01:52:56PM +0200, Lukas Czerner wrote:
> Previous e2fsprogs versions allowed to create a file system with both
> resize_inode and meta_bg enabled. This was fixed by upstream commit
> 42e77d5d ("libext2fs: don't create filesystems with meta_bg and resize_inode")
> 
> However e2fsck still does not recognize the conflict and will attempt to
> clear and recreate resize_inode if it's corrupted due to this incompatible
> feature combination, though it will create it in the same wrong layout.
> 
> Fix it by teaching e2fsck to recognize resize_inode and meta_bg
> conflict and fixing it by disabling and clearing resize inode.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>

I can tell that you didn't run "make check" before sending the commit
out; because if you did, you would have noticed this:

*** Unordered problem table:
curr code = 0x00000031: @S last mount time (%t,
	now = %T) is in the future.

*** prev code = 0x00000051: Resize_@i and meta_bg features are enabled. Those features are
not compatible. Resize @i should be disabled.  
*** This is a programming error in e2fsck
make: *** [Makefile:469: check] Error 1o

I fixed this up, and ran a quick test case, so I'll apply it, but it
would be great if you could create a regression test case.

Thanks!

				- Ted