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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 13 May 2022 14:35:27 -0700
From:   Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
To:     Chao Yu <chao@...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

On 05/09, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 05/08, Chao Yu wrote:
> > Ping,
> 
> This is in my TODO list, but will take some time. Sorry.

Got this.

sanity_check_inode: inode (ino=1125d, mode=41471) reason(0, 98, 3452, 4, 0, 0) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix

Ok, this is a symlink, which was encrypted having inline_data.

> 
> > 
> > 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;
> > >    	}
> > > 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
> Linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel