linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] btrfs: Fix an error handling path in btrfs_read_sys

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]

Date:   Mon, 16 May 2022 19:42:23 +0200
From:   Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
To:     dsterba@...e.cz, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@....com>, Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
        Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>,
        David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>, Qu Wenruo <wqu@...e.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs: Fix an error handling path in
 btrfs_read_sys_array()

Le 16/05/2022 à 17:01, David Sterba a écrit :
> On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 04:54:07PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> On Sun, May 15, 2022 at 06:57:25AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2022/5/14 20:01, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
>>>> If alloc_dummy_extent_buffer() we should return an error code, not 0 that
>>>> would mean success.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: a1fc41ac28d3 ("btrfs: use dummy extent buffer for super block sys chunk array read")
>>>> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@...e.com>
>>>
>>> All my fault, thanks for catching it.
>>> Qu
>>>
>>
>> I sent this patch in January and David was going to fold it into the
>> original patch but it got lost.  Thanks, Christophe!

Hi,

Not exactly.
Your patch was:
-	if (IS_ERR(sb))
-		return PTR_ERR(sb);
+	if (!sb)
+		return -ENOMEM;

Mine is only:
-		return PTR_ERR(sb);
+		return -ENOMEM;

So for some reason, what you had reported was just half applied. (or 
half fixed by someone else)

> 
> I found my reply to your fix that I folded the fixup, but then it got
> lost for some reason. Probably because I picked the patchset from
> mailing list again and did not take the local branch. I'll fold the fix
> again as it' still in the unmerged branch. Thanks.
> 

just in case, the Fixes tag in Dan's patch leads to:
      "Notice: this object is not reachable from any branch."

I don't think that it is of any importance if the fix in folded, but in 
case, I let you know.

CJ