All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
To: Bill O'Donnell <billodo@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] libxfs: add more bounds checking to sb sanity checks
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 10:07:34 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180726170734.GF30972@magnolia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180726164046.18503-1-billodo@redhat.com>

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:40:46AM -0500, Bill O'Donnell wrote:
> Current sb verifier doesn't check bounds on sb_fdblocks and sb_ifree.
> Add sanity checks for these parameters.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bill O'Donnell <billodo@redhat.com>
> ---
> 
> v4: adjust control flow to standard error checking. Add
>     more descriptive comment. Add validation for sb_icount.
> v3: eliminate need for additional write_flag, doing those
>     unique checks in xfs_sb_write_verify()
> v2: make extra sanity checks exclusive to writes
> 
>  fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c | 46 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> index b3ad15956366..8d8e579ca426 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> @@ -599,22 +599,16 @@ xfs_sb_to_disk(
>  static int
>  xfs_sb_verify(
>  	struct xfs_buf	*bp,
> +	struct xfs_sb	*sb,
>  	bool		check_version)
>  {
>  	struct xfs_mount *mp = bp->b_target->bt_mount;
> -	struct xfs_sb	sb;
> -
> -	/*
> -	 * Use call variant which doesn't convert quota flags from disk 
> -	 * format, because xfs_mount_validate_sb checks the on-disk flags.
> -	 */
> -	__xfs_sb_from_disk(&sb, XFS_BUF_TO_SBP(bp), false);
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Only check the in progress field for the primary superblock as
>  	 * mkfs.xfs doesn't clear it from secondary superblocks.
>  	 */
> -	return xfs_mount_validate_sb(mp, &sb,
> +	return xfs_mount_validate_sb(mp, sb,
>  				     bp->b_maps[0].bm_bn == XFS_SB_DADDR,
>  				     check_version);
>  }
> @@ -637,6 +631,7 @@ xfs_sb_read_verify(
>  {
>  	struct xfs_mount *mp = bp->b_target->bt_mount;
>  	struct xfs_dsb	*dsb = XFS_BUF_TO_SBP(bp);
> +	struct xfs_sb	sb;
>  	int		error;
>  
>  	/*
> @@ -657,7 +652,13 @@ xfs_sb_read_verify(
>  			}
>  		}
>  	}
> -	error = xfs_sb_verify(bp, true);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Use call variant which doesn't convert quota flags from disk
> +	 * format, because xfs_mount_validate_sb checks the on-disk flags.
> +	 */
> +	__xfs_sb_from_disk(&sb, XFS_BUF_TO_SBP(bp), false);
> +	error = xfs_sb_verify(bp, &sb, true);
>  
>  out_error:
>  	if (error == -EFSCORRUPTED || error == -EFSBADCRC)
> @@ -693,9 +694,34 @@ xfs_sb_write_verify(
>  {
>  	struct xfs_mount	*mp = bp->b_target->bt_mount;
>  	struct xfs_buf_log_item	*bip = bp->b_log_item;
> +	struct xfs_sb		sb;
>  	int			error;
>  
> -	error = xfs_sb_verify(bp, false);
> +	/*
> +	 * Use call variant which doesn't convert quota flags from disk
> +	 * format, because xfs_mount_validate_sb checks the on-disk flags.
> +	 */
> +	__xfs_sb_from_disk(&sb, XFS_BUF_TO_SBP(bp), false);
> +
> +	error = xfs_sb_verify(bp, &sb, false);
> +	if (error)
> +		goto err;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Carry out additional sb sanity checks exclusively for writes.
> +	 * We don't do these checks for reads, since faulty parameters could
> +	 * already be on disk, and we shouldn't preclude reads for those
> +	 * cases.
> +	 */
> +	if (sb.sb_fdblocks > sb.sb_dblocks ||
> +	    sb.sb_icount / sb.sb_inopblock > sb.sb_dblocks ||

This is a 64-bit division, which won't work on 32-bit builds.

That said, I also wrote a xfs_verify_icount function for the fs summary
scrub patch, so perhaps we should collaborate to land both of these?
Send a v5 without this test and I'll immediately send a patch adding
both the _verify_icount and putting it to use here.

Actually, I could just modify your patch, add mine, and send both of
them.  That'd be easier...

--D

> +	    sb.sb_ifree > sb.sb_icount) {
> +		xfs_notice(mp, "SB sanity check failed");
> +		error = -EFSCORRUPTED;
> +		goto err;
> +	}
> +
> +err:
>  	if (error) {
>  		xfs_verifier_error(bp, error, __this_address);
>  		return;
> -- 
> 2.17.1
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  reply	other threads:[~2018-07-26 18:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-07-13 13:10 [PATCH] libxfs: add more bounds checking to sb sanity checks Bill O'Donnell
2018-07-13 16:41 ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-13 20:06   ` Bill O'Donnell
2018-07-13 23:43   ` Dave Chinner
2018-07-17 17:13     ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-16 19:26 ` [PATCH v2] " Bill O'Donnell
2018-07-17  9:17   ` Carlos Maiolino
2018-07-17 17:06   ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-17 17:17     ` Bill O'Donnell
2018-07-17 19:12       ` Bill O'Donnell
2018-07-17 20:33         ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-17 23:26           ` Dave Chinner
2018-07-18 20:07             ` Bill O'Donnell
2018-07-25 21:33 ` [PATCH v3] " Bill O'Donnell
2018-07-25 21:47   ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-25 21:58     ` Bill O'Donnell
2018-07-25 22:48   ` Eric Sandeen
2018-07-25 22:55     ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-26 16:40 ` [PATCH v4] " Bill O'Donnell
2018-07-26 17:07   ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2018-07-26 17:19     ` Bill O'Donnell

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180726170734.GF30972@magnolia \
    --to=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
    --cc=billodo@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.