linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next v3 2/2] erofs: reliably distinguish block based and fscache mode

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]

Message-ID: <f8f77b76-e2a0-4e8c-900e-eed569ca7136@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 19:52:27 +0800
From: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Baokun Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>, linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org
Cc: xiang@...nel.org, chao@...nel.org, huyue2@...lpad.com,
 viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 yangerkun@...wei.com, houtao1@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v3 2/2] erofs: reliably distinguish block based and
 fscache mode



On 4/19/24 8:36 PM, Baokun Li wrote:
> From: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
> 
> When erofs_kill_sb() is called in block dev based mode, s_bdev may not
> have been initialised yet, and if CONFIG_EROFS_FS_ONDEMAND is enabled,
> it will be mistaken for fscache mode, and then attempt to free an anon_dev
> that has never been allocated, triggering the following warning:
> 
> ============================================
> ida_free called for id=0 which is not allocated.
> WARNING: CPU: 14 PID: 926 at lib/idr.c:525 ida_free+0x134/0x140
> Modules linked in:
> CPU: 14 PID: 926 Comm: mount Not tainted 6.9.0-rc3-dirty #630
> RIP: 0010:ida_free+0x134/0x140
> Call Trace:
>  <TASK>
>  erofs_kill_sb+0x81/0x90
>  deactivate_locked_super+0x35/0x80
>  get_tree_bdev+0x136/0x1e0
>  vfs_get_tree+0x2c/0xf0
>  do_new_mount+0x190/0x2f0
>  [...]
> ============================================
> 
> Now when erofs_kill_sb() is called, erofs_sb_info must have been
> initialised, so use sbi->fsid to distinguish between the two modes.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Baokun Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>

Reviewed-by: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@...ux.alibaba.com>


> ---
>  fs/erofs/super.c | 8 ++------
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/erofs/super.c b/fs/erofs/super.c
> index 21faa49bc970..30b49b2eee53 100644
> --- a/fs/erofs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/erofs/super.c
> @@ -789,17 +789,13 @@ static int erofs_init_fs_context(struct fs_context *fc)
>  
>  static void erofs_kill_sb(struct super_block *sb)
>  {
> -	struct erofs_sb_info *sbi;
> +	struct erofs_sb_info *sbi = EROFS_SB(sb);
>  
> -	if (erofs_is_fscache_mode(sb))
> +	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EROFS_FS_ONDEMAND) && sbi->fsid)
>  		kill_anon_super(sb);
>  	else
>  		kill_block_super(sb);
>  
> -	sbi = EROFS_SB(sb);
> -	if (!sbi)
> -		return;
> -
>  	erofs_free_dev_context(sbi->devs);
>  	fs_put_dax(sbi->dax_dev, NULL);
>  	erofs_fscache_unregister_fs(sb);

-- 
Thanks,
Jingbo