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  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:	Mon,  7 Jul 2014 16:58:20 -0700
From:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	stable@...r.kernel.org, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
Subject: [PATCH 3.10 35/53] ext4: Fix buffer double free in ext4_alloc_branch()

3.10-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>

commit c5c7b8ddfbf8cb3b2291e515a34ab1b8982f5a2d upstream.

Error recovery in ext4_alloc_branch() calls ext4_forget() even for
buffer corresponding to indirect block it did not allocate. This leads
to brelse() being called twice for that buffer (once from ext4_forget()
and once from cleanup in ext4_ind_map_blocks()) leading to buffer use
count misaccounting. Eventually (but often much later because there
are other users of the buffer) we will see messages like:
VFS: brelse: Trying to free free buffer

Another manifestation of this problem is an error:
JBD2 unexpected failure: jbd2_journal_revoke: !buffer_revoked(bh);
inconsistent data on disk

The fix is easy - don't forget buffer we did not allocate. Also add an
explanatory comment because the indexing at ext4_alloc_branch() is
somewhat subtle.

Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 fs/ext4/indirect.c |    8 +++++++-
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/fs/ext4/indirect.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/indirect.c
@@ -390,7 +390,13 @@ static int ext4_alloc_branch(handle_t *h
 	return 0;
 failed:
 	for (; i >= 0; i--) {
-		if (i != indirect_blks && branch[i].bh)
+		/*
+		 * We want to ext4_forget() only freshly allocated indirect
+		 * blocks.  Buffer for new_blocks[i-1] is at branch[i].bh and
+		 * buffer at branch[0].bh is indirect block / inode already
+		 * existing before ext4_alloc_branch() was called.
+		 */
+		if (i > 0 && i != indirect_blks && branch[i].bh)
 			ext4_forget(handle, 1, inode, branch[i].bh,
 				    branch[i].bh->b_blocknr);
 		ext4_free_blocks(handle, inode, NULL, new_blocks[i],


--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists