linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] ext4: find old entry again if failed to rename whiteout

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: <YFbErxtWpQJ7eTbQ@mit.edu>
Date:   Sat, 20 Mar 2021 23:59:43 -0400
From:   "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To:     "zhangyi (F)" <yi.zhang@...wei.com>
Cc:     linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, jack@...e.cz, yangerkun@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] ext4: find old entry again if failed to rename
 whiteout

On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 10:01:50AM +0800, zhangyi (F) wrote:
> 
> In this error path of whiteout rename, we want to restore the old inode
> number and old name back to the old entry, it's just a rollback operation.
> The old entry will stay where it was in common cases, but it can be moved
> from the first block to the leaf block during make indexed dir for one
> special case, but it cannot be deleted in theory. So if we cannot find it
> again, there must some bad thing happen and the filesystem may probably
> inconsistency. So I calling ext4_std_error() here，or am I missing something？

After looking at this more closely, I agree, this should be OK.  The
directory is going to be locked, so it shouldn't be changing out from
under us.

Thanks, applied.

					- Ted