linux-ext4 - [PATCH v2 1/4] ext4: unify the type of flexbg

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20231023013057.2117948-2-libaokun1@huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 23 Oct 2023 09:30:54 +0800
From:   Baokun Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>
To:     <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     <tytso@....edu>, <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>, <jack@...e.cz>,
        <ritesh.list@...il.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <yi.zhang@...wei.com>, <yangerkun@...wei.com>,
        <yukuai3@...wei.com>, <libaokun1@...wei.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/4] ext4: unify the type of flexbg_size to unsigned int

The maximum value of flexbg_size is 2^31, but the maximum value of int
is (2^31 - 1), so overflow may occur when the type of flexbg_size is
declared as int.

For example, when uninit_mask is initialized in ext4_alloc_group_tables(),
if flexbg_size == 2^31, the initialized uninit_mask is incorrect, and this
may causes set_flexbg_block_bitmap() to trigger a BUG_ON().

Therefore, the flexbg_size type is declared as unsigned int to avoid
overflow and memory waste.

Signed-off-by: Baokun Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
---
 fs/ext4/resize.c | 13 +++++++------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext4/resize.c b/fs/ext4/resize.c
index 4fe061edefdd..c6d4539d4c1f 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/resize.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/resize.c
@@ -228,7 +228,7 @@ struct ext4_new_flex_group_data {
  *
  * Returns NULL on failure otherwise address of the allocated structure.
  */
-static struct ext4_new_flex_group_data *alloc_flex_gd(unsigned long flexbg_size)
+static struct ext4_new_flex_group_data *alloc_flex_gd(unsigned int flexbg_size)
 {
 	struct ext4_new_flex_group_data *flex_gd;
 
@@ -283,7 +283,7 @@ static void free_flex_gd(struct ext4_new_flex_group_data *flex_gd)
  */
 static int ext4_alloc_group_tables(struct super_block *sb,
 				struct ext4_new_flex_group_data *flex_gd,
-				int flexbg_size)
+				unsigned int flexbg_size)
 {
 	struct ext4_new_group_data *group_data = flex_gd->groups;
 	ext4_fsblk_t start_blk;
@@ -384,12 +384,12 @@ static int ext4_alloc_group_tables(struct super_block *sb,
 		group = group_data[0].group;
 
 		printk(KERN_DEBUG "EXT4-fs: adding a flex group with "
-		       "%d groups, flexbg size is %d:\n", flex_gd->count,
+		       "%u groups, flexbg size is %u:\n", flex_gd->count,
 		       flexbg_size);
 
 		for (i = 0; i < flex_gd->count; i++) {
 			ext4_debug(
-			       "adding %s group %u: %u blocks (%d free, %d mdata blocks)\n",
+			       "adding %s group %u: %u blocks (%u free, %u mdata blocks)\n",
 			       ext4_bg_has_super(sb, group + i) ? "normal" :
 			       "no-super", group + i,
 			       group_data[i].blocks_count,
@@ -1606,7 +1606,7 @@ static int ext4_flex_group_add(struct super_block *sb,
 static int ext4_setup_next_flex_gd(struct super_block *sb,
 				    struct ext4_new_flex_group_data *flex_gd,
 				    ext4_fsblk_t n_blocks_count,
-				    unsigned long flexbg_size)
+				    unsigned int flexbg_size)
 {
 	struct ext4_sb_info *sbi = EXT4_SB(sb);
 	struct ext4_super_block *es = sbi->s_es;
@@ -1990,8 +1990,9 @@ int ext4_resize_fs(struct super_block *sb, ext4_fsblk_t n_blocks_count)
 	ext4_fsblk_t o_blocks_count;
 	ext4_fsblk_t n_blocks_count_retry = 0;
 	unsigned long last_update_time = 0;
-	int err = 0, flexbg_size = 1 << sbi->s_log_groups_per_flex;
+	int err = 0;
 	int meta_bg;
+	unsigned int flexbg_size = ext4_flex_bg_size(sbi);
 
 	/* See if the device is actually as big as what was requested */
 	bh = ext4_sb_bread(sb, n_blocks_count - 1, 0);
-- 
2.31.1