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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 15:00:29 -0400 From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu> To: Artem Blagodarenko <artem.blagodarenko@...il.com> Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, linux@...musvillemoes.dk Subject: Re: [PATCH] e2fsck: process empty directory if large_dir and inline_data set On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 05:42:37PM +0300, Artem Blagodarenko wrote: > Doing a forced check on an ext4 file system with inline_data and > large_dir results in lots of fsck messages. To reproduce: > ... > > Rootcause of this issue is large_dir optimization that is not > appropriate for inline_data. > > Let's not optimize it if inline_data is set. > > Reported-by: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk> > Signed-off-by: Artem Blagodarenko <c17828@...y.com> Thanks, applied, although I corrected the commit description. The initial description now reads: e2fsck: correctly handle inline directories when large_dir is enabled. Historically, e2fsck has required that directories not contain holes. (In fact, as of this writing, ext4 still requires this to be the case.) Commit ae9efd05a98 ("e2fsck: 3 level hash tree directory optimization") removed this requirement if the large_dir feature is enabled; however, the way it was done caused it to incorrectly handle inline directories. To reproduce the problem fixed by this commit: ... BTW, Removing the directory hole check in commit ae9efd05a98 for file systems with the large_dir feature enabled was a wee bit optimistic, since the kernel will still mark the file system as corrupted. Fixing the kernel so that it doesn't complain about directories with holes is going to be a bit more complicated than just removing the check in __ext4_read_dirblock(): if (!bh) { ext4_error_inode(inode, func, line, block, "Directory hole found"); return ERR_PTR(-EFSCORRUPTED); } (That's because we have to fix all of the callers of ext4_read_dirblock() to handle the case where it returns NULL if there is no directory block at that specified location.) I should have caught that when reviewing the e2fsprogs commit; my bad. At this point, we should just fix the kernel so it can handle directories with holes (both for large_dir and non-large_dir directories). - Ted
Powered by blists - more mailing lists