[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190815072534.GA38177@138>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:25:35 +0800
From: Gao Xiang <gaoxiang25@...wei.com>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de>
CC: linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz>,
Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
"Darrick J . Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
"Jaegeuk Kim" <jaegeuk@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
<devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>, <linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>, Miao Xie <miaoxie@...wei.com>,
Li Guifu <bluce.liguifu@...wei.com>,
Fang Wei <fangwei1@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 08/24] erofs: add namei functions
Hi Pavel,
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 09:01:32AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > + /*
> > > > + * on-disk error, let's only BUG_ON in the debugging mode.
> > > > + * otherwise, it will return 1 to just skip the invalid name
> > > > + * and go on (in consideration of the lookup performance).
> > > > + */
> > > > + DBG_BUGON(qd->name > qd->end);
> > >
> > > I believe you should check for errors in non-debug mode, too.
> >
> > Thanks for your kindly reply!
> >
> > The following is just my personal thought... If I am wrong, please
> > kindly point out...
> >
> > As you can see, this is a new prefixed string binary search algorithm
> > which can provide similar performance with hashed approach (but no
> > need to store hash value at all), so I really care about its lookup
> > performance.
> >
> > There is something needing to be concerned, is, whether namei() should
> > report any potential on-disk issues or just return -ENOENT for these
> > corrupted dirs, I think I tend to use the latter one.
>
> -ENOENT is okay for corrupted directories, as long as corrupted
> directories do not cause some kind of security bugs (memory
> corruption, crashes, ...)
Yes, I am certain that it will return -ENOENT for such corrupted
directories and it will certainly not crash the kernel as well.
I have fuzzed it for several months and it seems fine after
commit 419d6efc50e9 ("staging: erofs: keep corrupted fs from crashing kernel in erofs_namei()")
Don't worry about that :)
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
>
>
> Best regards,
> Pavel
> --
> DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
> HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Powered by blists - more mailing lists