linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 7/8] fat (exportfs): rebuild directory-inode if fat

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]

Date:	Wed, 5 Dec 2012 20:56:38 +0900
From:	Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@...il.com>
To:	OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@...sung.com>,
	Ravishankar N <ravi.n1@...sung.com>,
	Amit Sahrawat <a.sahrawat@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 7/8] fat (exportfs): rebuild directory-inode if
 fat_dget() fails

2012/12/5, OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>:
> Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@...il.com> writes:
>
>>>>> This became much better than before. However, we have to consolidate
>>>>> the
>>>>> code with fat_search_long() finally.
>>>>>
>>>>> E.g. this version is having the issue already fixed. If there is
>>>>> corruption in fat cluster-chain, it lead to infinite
>>>>> loop. fat_get_cluster() checks infinite loop by limit.
>>>> since, the focus this time was for NFS functionality for FAT (removing
>>>> ESTALE error). The changes were made in that context.
>>>>
>>>> Later, we can make the changes as part of code reorganizing which can
>>>> be controlled via. Separate patches which do not have any impact on
>>>> default functionality and verification can be carried out in that
>>>> scope.
>>>
>>> Right. But non-production code shouldn't go into linus tree. I meant, we
>>> can test this patch series, but not yet production quality.
>> Is there any other thing which seems potential issue than offsetof()?
>> if yes, which problem didn't lead to production quality do you think ?
>>
>> +#define FAT_FID_SIZE_WITHOUT_PARENT (offsetof(struct fat_fid, \
>> +					      parent_i_pos_hi)/4)
>> Since this expression does not result proper integer value, so will it
>> be correct to directly put the value like
>> +#define FAT_FID_SIZE_WITHOUT_PARENT 3
>
> The issue is what I explained in the above "E.g.".
>
> Directory traversal logic should be consolidate with fat_search_log().
> Otherwise, like this nfs implement, we will introduce already-fixed-problem
> again. And we will be bothered to fix same issue in future.
Okay, We will check how we can consolidate the 2 paths to avoid any issue.

Thanks OGAWA!
> --
> OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/