[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87plsym65w.fsf@mailhost.krisman.be>
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2024 10:50:51 -0400
From: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@...e.de>
To: Lizhi Xu <lizhi.xu@...driver.com>
Cc: <lkp@...el.com>, <coreteam@...filter.org>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
<ebiggers@...nel.org>, <fw@...len.de>, <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
<kadlec@...filter.org>, <kuba@...nel.org>,
<linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<llvm@...ts.linux.dev>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>, <oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev>,
<pablo@...filter.org>,
<syzbot+340581ba9dceb7e06fb3@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
<syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com>, <tytso@....edu>,
<adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>, <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5] ext4: check hash version and filesystem casefolded
consistent
Lizhi Xu <lizhi.xu@...driver.com> writes:
> When mounting the ext4 filesystem, if the hash version and casefolded are not
> consistent, exit the mounting.
>
> Reported-by: syzbot+340581ba9dceb7e06fb3@...kaller.appspotmail.com
> Signed-off-by: Lizhi Xu <lizhi.xu@...driver.com>
> ---
> fs/ext4/super.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/super.c b/fs/ext4/super.c
> index c682fb927b64..0ad326504c50 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/super.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/super.c
> @@ -5262,6 +5262,11 @@ static int __ext4_fill_super(struct fs_context *fc, struct super_block *sb)
> goto failed_mount;
>
> ext4_hash_info_init(sb);
> + if (es->s_def_hash_version == DX_HASH_SIPHASH &&
> + !ext4_has_feature_casefold(sb)) {
Can we ever have DX_HASH_SIPHASH set up in the super block? I thought
it was used solely for directories where ext4_hash_in_dirent(inode) is
true.
If this is only for the case of a superblock corruption, perhaps we
should always reject the mount, whether casefold is enabled or not?
--
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists