From: Zhan Xusheng <zhanxusheng1024@gmail.com>
To: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: Konstantin Komarov <almaz.alexandrovich@paragon-software.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Zhan Xusheng <zhanxusheng@xiaomi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/ntfs3: reject evcn == U64_MAX in mi_enum_attr()
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2026 10:03:09 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260425020309.1663-1-zhanxusheng@xiaomi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260424161558.2d21b624@pumpkin>
On Fri, 24 Apr 2026 16:15:58 +0100
David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is that analysis correct? with the current code:
> If evcn is 2 then everything except 0, 1, 2 and 3 are errors.
> If evcn is -3 then only -1 is an error.
> If evcn is -2 no values are errors.
> If evcn is -1 then all svcn values except 0 are errors.
>
> Clearly this doesn't make sense if evcn is -1.
>
> But there isn't an obvious reason why svcn == -4, evcn == -1
> shouldn't be a valid range.
> (There might be a sanity upper limit is evcn for other reasons.)
Thanks for looking into this, David.
The on-disk svcn/evcn fields are __le64 (ntfs.h:339-340), and ntfs3
uses them as u64 throughout -- the internal VCN type CLST is typedef'd
to u32 or u64 (ntfs.h:73-78). NTFS VCNs are unsigned by definition;
there is no such thing as a negative VCN.
So the signed interpretation doesn't apply here. In the unsigned
domain, 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF is simply the maximum u64 value, not -1.
The only issue is the arithmetic wrap: (u64)0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF + 1 == 0.
Regarding a separate upper bound: yes, evcn is also bounded by the
volume's total cluster count, but mi_enum_attr() validates on-disk
MFT records before the superblock fields are necessarily available
to every caller, so the U64_MAX check is the minimal fix for the
overflow.
Thanks,
Zhan Xusheng
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-25 2:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-24 2:46 [PATCH] fs/ntfs3: reject evcn == U64_MAX in mi_enum_attr() Zhan Xusheng
2026-04-24 9:20 ` David Laight
2026-04-24 13:20 ` Zhan Xusheng
2026-04-24 15:15 ` David Laight
2026-04-25 2:03 ` Zhan Xusheng [this message]
2026-04-25 10:42 ` David Laight
2026-04-27 3:47 ` [PATCH v2] fs/ntfs3: reject invalid evcn == (u64)-1 " Zhan Xusheng
2026-04-27 3:50 ` [PATCH v3] " Zhan Xusheng
2026-05-15 8:23 ` [PATCH v4] fs/ntfs3: reject out-of-range evcn " fra-build
2026-05-15 9:28 ` David Laight
2026-05-28 14:03 ` Konstantin Komarov
2026-06-24 3:44 ` [PATCH v5] " Zhan Xusheng
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=20260425020309.1663-1-zhanxusheng@xiaomi.com \
--to=zhanxusheng1024@gmail.com \
--cc=almaz.alexandrovich@paragon-software.com \
--cc=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zhanxusheng@xiaomi.com \
/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.