[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y4UdoyF6+oDI6w5P@mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2022 15:44:19 -0500
From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To: "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@...il.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Baokun Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, adilger.kernel@...ger.ca,
lczerner@...hat.com, enwlinux@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yi.zhang@...wei.com,
yebin10@...wei.com, yukuai3@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ext4: add inode table check in __ext4_get_inode_loc
to aovid possible infinite loop
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 08:13:53PM +0530, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) wrote:
> Folding a small patch to implement the simple bound check. Is this the right
> approach?
>
> From: "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@...il.com>
> Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2022 07:53:58 -0500
> Subject: [RFC] ext4: Add ext4_sb_getblk() wrapper for block bounds checking
>
> We might need more bounds checking on the block before calling sb_getblk().
> This helper does that and if it is not valid then returns ERR_PTR(-EFSCORRUPTED)
> Later we will need to carefully convert the callers to use ext4_sb_getblk()
> instead of sb_getblk().
Hey Ritesh,
I was going through some old patches and came across this RFC patch.
Have you had a chance to polish this up? I don't think I've seen a
newer version of this patch, but maybe I missed it.
Thanks,
- Ted
Powered by blists - more mailing lists