linux-kernel - Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c717cdc3-bb6f-d437-f039-d05418c9dd88@kernel.org>
Date:   Sun, 8 May 2022 21:52:06 +0800
From:   Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>
To:     Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
Cc:     Ming Yan <yanming@....edu.cn>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode

Ping,

On 2022/5/5 22:33, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2022/5/5 11:31, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>> On 05/05, Chao Yu wrote:
>>> On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>>>> On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote:
>>>>> As Yanming reported in bugzilla:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895
>>>>>
>>>>> I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17.
>>>>>
>>>>> The kernel message is shown below:
>>>>>
>>>>> kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611!
>>>>> Call Trace:
>>>>>     evict+0x282/0x4e0
>>>>>     __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0
>>>>>     dput+0x2dd/0x720
>>>>>     do_renameat2+0x596/0x970
>>>>>     __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90
>>>>>     do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90
>>>>>
>>>>> The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted
>>>>> flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(),
>>>>> it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then
>>>>> page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode().
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline
>>>>> data inode in sanity_check_inode().
>>>>>
>>>>> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
>>>>> Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@....edu.cn>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@...o.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>     fs/f2fs/f2fs.h  | 7 +++++++
>>>>>     fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +--
>>>>>     2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>>> index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644
>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>>> @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode)
>>>>>      */
>>>>>     static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode)
>>>>>     {
>>>>> +	/*
>>>>> +	 * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not
>>>>> +	 * been synchronized to inmem fields.
>>>>> +	 */
>>>>> +	if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) ||
>>>>> +			F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL)
>>>>> +		return true;
>>>>>     	return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) ||
>>>>>     		f2fs_compressed_file(inode);
>>>>>     }
>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
>>>>> index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644
>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
>>>>> @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page)
>>>>>     		}
>>>>>     	}
>>>>> -	if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) &&
>>>>> -			(!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) {
>>>>> +	if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) {
>>>>
>>>> It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix.
>>>
>>> sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization,
>>> file should not be set as atomic one, right?
>>>
>>> I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you
>>> please provide me detail of the testcase?
>>
>> I just applied this into my device and was getting lots of the below error
>> messages resulting in open failures of database files.
> 
> Could you please help to apply below patch and dump the log?
> 
> From: Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>
> Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@...o.com>
> ---
>    fs/f2fs/f2fs.h  |  7 +++++++
>    fs/f2fs/inode.c | 11 +++++++----
>    2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> index 0f8c426aed50..13a9212d6cb6 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> @@ -4159,6 +4159,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode)
>     */
>    static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode)
>    {
> +	/*
> +	 * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not
> +	 * been synchronized to inmem fields.
> +	 */
> +	if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) ||
> +			F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL)
> +		return true;
>    	return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) ||
>    		f2fs_compressed_file(inode);
>    }
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> index 02630c17da93..a98614a24ad0 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> @@ -276,11 +276,14 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page)
>    		}
>    	}
> 
> -	if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) &&
> -			(!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) {
> +	if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) {
>    		set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK);
> -		f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix",
> -			  __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode);
> +		f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) reason(%d, %llu, %ld, %d, %d, %lu) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix",
> +			  __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode,
> +			  f2fs_is_atomic_file(inode),
> +			  i_size_read(inode), MAX_INLINE_DATA(inode),
> +			  file_is_encrypt(inode), file_is_verity(inode),
> +			  F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL);
>    		return false;
>    	}
>