linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.9 085/119] btrfs: use correct types for page indices in btrfs_page_exists_in

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: <20170612152602.829797049@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Mon, 12 Jun 2017 17:25:47 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@...cle.com>,
        David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>
Subject: [PATCH 4.9 085/119] btrfs: use correct types for page indices in btrfs_page_exists_in_range

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

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

From: David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>

commit cc2b702c52094b637a351d7491ac5200331d0445 upstream.

Variables start_idx and end_idx are supposed to hold a page index
derived from the file offsets. The int type is not the right one though,
offsets larger than 1 << 44 will get silently trimmed off the high bits.
(1 << 44 is 16TiB)

What can go wrong, if start is below the boundary and end gets trimmed:
- if there's a page after start, we'll find it (radix_tree_gang_lookup_slot)
- the final check "if (page->index <= end_idx)" will unexpectedly fail

The function will return false, ie. "there's no page in the range",
although there is at least one.

btrfs_page_exists_in_range is used to prevent races in:

* in hole punching, where we make sure there are not pages in the
  truncated range, otherwise we'll wait for them to finish and redo
  truncation, but we're going to replace the pages with holes anyway so
  the only problem is the intermediate state

* lock_extent_direct: we want to make sure there are no pages before we
  lock and start DIO, to prevent stale data reads

For practical occurence of the bug, there are several constaints.  The
file must be quite large, the affected range must cross the 16TiB
boundary and the internal state of the file pages and pending operations
must match.  Also, we must not have started any ordered data in the
range, otherwise we don't even reach the buggy function check.

DIO locking tries hard in several places to avoid deadlocks with
buffered IO and avoids waiting for ranges. The worst consequence seems
to be stale data read.

CC: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@...cle.com>
Fixes: fc4adbff823f7 ("btrfs: Drop EXTENT_UPTODATE check in hole punching and direct locking")
Reviewed-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@...cle.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 fs/btrfs/inode.c |    4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
@@ -7435,8 +7435,8 @@ bool btrfs_page_exists_in_range(struct i
 	int found = false;
 	void **pagep = NULL;
 	struct page *page = NULL;
-	int start_idx;
-	int end_idx;
+	unsigned long start_idx;
+	unsigned long end_idx;

 	start_idx = start >> PAGE_SHIFT;