linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 1/4] ext4: Handle error of ext4_setup_system

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200727112222.o456ugnebuzu2hks@work>
Date:   Mon, 27 Jul 2020 13:22:22 +0200
From:   Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>
To:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:     Ted Tso <tytso@....edu>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Wolfgang Frisch <wolfgang.frisch@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] ext4: Handle error of ext4_setup_system_zone() on
 remount

On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 01:02:21PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 21-07-20 12:36:28, Lukas Czerner wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 03:18:09PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > ext4_setup_system_zone() can fail. Handle the failure in ext4_remount().
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
> > > ---
> > >  fs/ext4/super.c | 5 ++++-
> > >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/fs/ext4/super.c b/fs/ext4/super.c
> > > index 330957ed1f05..8e055ec57a2c 100644
> > > --- a/fs/ext4/super.c
> > > +++ b/fs/ext4/super.c
> > > @@ -5653,7 +5653,10 @@ static int ext4_remount(struct super_block *sb, int *flags, char *data)
> > >  		ext4_register_li_request(sb, first_not_zeroed);
> > >  	}
> > >  
> > > -	ext4_setup_system_zone(sb);
> > > +	err = ext4_setup_system_zone(sb);
> > > +	if (err)
> > > +		goto restore_opts;
> > > +
> > 
> > Thanks Jan, this looks good. But while you're at it, ext4_remount is
> > missing ext4_release_system_zone() and so it we want to enable block_validity
> > on remount and it fails after ext4_setup_system_zone() we wont release
> > it. This *I think* means that we would end up with block_validity
> > enabled without user knowing about it ?
> 
> And vice-versa, yes. I'll add a patch that fixes this bug to the series but
> it's independent issue. Can I add your reviewed-by for this patch?

Yes, of course. You can add

Reviewed-by: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>

Thanks!
-Lukas

> 
> 								Honza
> -- 
> Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
> SUSE Labs, CR
>