| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <bed4eb2f-2261-5f88-1359-b00881a174da@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2019 15:09:29 +0800
From: Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>
To: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
CC: Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity with enabled features
in image
On 2019/7/29 13:47, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 07/23, Chao Yu wrote:
>> On 2019/7/23 9:35, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>>> On 07/16, Chao Yu wrote:
>>>> Hi Jaegeuk,
>>>>
>>>> On 2019/5/9 9:15, Chao Yu wrote:
>>>>> On 2019/5/5 10:51, Chao Yu wrote:
>>>>>> On 2019/5/1 11:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>>>>>>> On 04/29, Chao Yu wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2019-4-28 21:38, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 04/24, Chao Yu wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> This patch fixes to do sanity with enabled features in image, if
>>>>>>>>>> there are features kernel can not recognize, just fail the mount.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We need to figure out per-feature-based rejection, since some of them can
>>>>>>>>> be set without layout change.
>>>>
>>>> What about adding one field in superblock for compatible features in future?
>>>>
>>>> sb.feature(F2FS_FEATURE_LAST, max] stores uncompatible features
>>>> sb.compatible_feature stores compatible features
>>>>
>>>> If we follow above rule when adding one feature, then, we can fail the mount if
>>>> sb.feature(F2FS_FEATURE_LAST, max] is valid.
>>>
>>> How about adding required_features flag in sb to check part of features only?
>>
>> You mean all incompatible features can be add into sb.required_features later
>> like this?
>>
>> __le32 required_features; /* incompatible feature to old kernel */
>>
>> And we can check required_features with supported features in current kernel?
>
> Yeah, I think so.
Copied, let me update the patch.
Thanks,
>
>>
>> if (le32_to_cpu(raw_super->required_features) &
>> (~NOW_SUPPORTED_FEATURES_IN_CURRENT_KERNEL)) {
>> print msg & ret error;
>> }
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So any suggestion on how to implement this?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which features do we need to disallow? When we introduce new features, they
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess it should be the new features.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> didn't hurt the previous flow by checking f2fs_sb_has_###().
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, but new features may use new disk layout, if old kernel handled it with old
>>>>>> disk layout, there must be problematic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> e.g. format image with -O extra_attr, and mount it with kernel who don't
>>>>>> recognize new inode layout.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jaegeuk,
>>>>>
>>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maybe:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> if (LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(4, 14, 0))
>>>>>>>> check 4.14+ features
>>>>>>>> else if (LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(4, 9, 0))
>>>>>>>> check 4.9+ features
>>>>>>>> else if (LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(4, 4, 0))
>>>>>>>> check 4.4+ features
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>
>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 13 +++++++++++++
>>>>>>>>>> fs/f2fs/super.c | 9 +++++++++
>>>>>>>>>> 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>>>>>>>> index f5ffc09705eb..15b640967e12 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -151,6 +151,19 @@ struct f2fs_mount_info {
>>>>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_VERITY 0x0400 /* reserved */
>>>>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SB_CHKSUM 0x0800
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> +#define F2FS_ALL_FEATURES (F2FS_FEATURE_ENCRYPT | \
>>>>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_BLKZONED | \
>>>>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_ATOMIC_WRITE | \
>>>>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_EXTRA_ATTR | \
>>>>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_PRJQUOTA | \
>>>>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_INODE_CHKSUM | \
>>>>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_FLEXIBLE_INLINE_XATTR | \
>>>>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_QUOTA_INO | \
>>>>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_INODE_CRTIME | \
>>>>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_LOST_FOUND | \
>>>>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_VERITY | \
>>>>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_SB_CHKSUM)
>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>> #define __F2FS_HAS_FEATURE(raw_super, mask) \
>>>>>>>>>> ((raw_super->feature & cpu_to_le32(mask)) != 0)
>>>>>>>>>> #define F2FS_HAS_FEATURE(sbi, mask) __F2FS_HAS_FEATURE(sbi->raw_super, mask)
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/super.c b/fs/f2fs/super.c
>>>>>>>>>> index 4f8e9ab48b26..57f2fc6d14ba 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/super.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -2573,6 +2573,15 @@ static int sanity_check_raw_super(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
>>>>>>>>>> return 1;
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> + /* check whether kernel supports all features */
>>>>>>>>>> + if (le32_to_cpu(raw_super->feature) & (~F2FS_ALL_FEATURES)) {
>>>>>>>>>> + f2fs_msg(sb, KERN_INFO,
>>>>>>>>>> + "Unsupported feature:%u: supported:%u",
>>>>>>>>>> + le32_to_cpu(raw_super->feature),
>>>>>>>>>> + F2FS_ALL_FEATURES);
>>>>>>>>>> + return 1;
>>>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>> /* check CP/SIT/NAT/SSA/MAIN_AREA area boundary */
>>>>>>>>>> if (sanity_check_area_boundary(sbi, bh))
>>>>>>>>>> return 1;
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> 2.18.0.rc1
>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
>>>>>> Linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
>>>>>> .
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
>>>>> Linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
>>>>> .
>>>>>
>>> .
>>>
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists