linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.9 22/66] reiserfs: fix race in prealloc discard

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: <20180129123840.993659227@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Mon, 29 Jan 2018 13:56:46 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@...e.com>,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Subject: [PATCH 4.9 22/66] reiserfs: fix race in prealloc discard

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

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

From: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@...e.com>

commit 08db141b5313ac2f64b844fb5725b8d81744b417 upstream.

The main loop in __discard_prealloc is protected by the reiserfs write lock
which is dropped across schedules like the BKL it replaced.  The problem is
that it checks the value, calls a routine that schedules, and then adjusts
the state.  As a result, two threads that are calling
reiserfs_prealloc_discard at the same time can race when one calls
reiserfs_free_prealloc_block, the lock is dropped, and the other calls
reiserfs_free_prealloc_block with the same block number.  In the right
circumstances, it can cause the prealloc count to go negative.

Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@...e.com>
Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 fs/reiserfs/bitmap.c |   12 ++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/fs/reiserfs/bitmap.c
+++ b/fs/reiserfs/bitmap.c
@@ -513,9 +513,17 @@ static void __discard_prealloc(struct re
 			       "inode has negative prealloc blocks count.");
 #endif
 	while (ei->i_prealloc_count > 0) {
-		reiserfs_free_prealloc_block(th, inode, ei->i_prealloc_block);
-		ei->i_prealloc_block++;
+		b_blocknr_t block_to_free;
+
+		/*
+		 * reiserfs_free_prealloc_block can drop the write lock,
+		 * which could allow another caller to free the same block.
+		 * We can protect against it by modifying the prealloc
+		 * state before calling it.
+		 */
+		block_to_free = ei->i_prealloc_block++;
 		ei->i_prealloc_count--;
+		reiserfs_free_prealloc_block(th, inode, block_to_free);
 		dirty = 1;
 	}
 	if (dirty)