linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] btrfs: replace stripe extents

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: <20240701135755.GE504479@perftesting>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 09:57:55 -0400
From: Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>
To: Johannes Thumshirn <jth@...nel.org>
Cc: Chris Mason <clm@...com>, David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>,
	linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] btrfs: replace stripe extents

On Mon, Jul 01, 2024 at 12:25:15PM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> From: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@....com>
> 
> If we can't insert a stripe extent in the RAID stripe tree, because
> the key that points to the specific position in the stripe tree is
> already existing, we have to remove the item and then replace it by a
> new item.
> 
> This can happen for example on device replace operations.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@....com>
> ---
>  fs/btrfs/raid-stripe-tree.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 34 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/raid-stripe-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/raid-stripe-tree.c
> index e6f7a234b8f6..3020820dd6e2 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/raid-stripe-tree.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/raid-stripe-tree.c
> @@ -73,6 +73,37 @@ int btrfs_delete_raid_extent(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, u64 start, u64 le
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +static int replace_raid_extent_item(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
> +				    struct btrfs_key *key,
> +				    struct btrfs_stripe_extent *stripe_extent,
> +				    const size_t item_size)
> +{
> +	struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = trans->fs_info;
> +	struct btrfs_root *stripe_root = fs_info->stripe_root;
> +	struct btrfs_path *path;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	path = btrfs_alloc_path();
> +	if (!path)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	ret = btrfs_search_slot(trans, stripe_root, key, path, -1, 1);
> +	if (ret)
> +		goto err;

This will leak 1 and we'll get an awkward btrfs_abort_transaction() call.  This
should be

if (ret) {
	ret = (ret == 1) ? -ENOENT : ret;
	goto err;
}

or whatever.  Thanks,

Josef