[PATCH 0/3] Simplify rejection of unexpected casefold inode flag

[PATCH 0/3] Simplify rejection of unexpected casefold inode flag

[Eric Biggers]

This series makes unexpected casefold flags on inodes be consistently
rejected early on so that additional validation isn't needed later on
during random filesystem operations.  For additional context, refer to
the discussion on patch 1 of
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20230812004146.30980-1-krisman@suse.de/T/#u

Applies to v6.5-rc6

Eric Biggers (3):
  ext4: reject casefold inode flag without casefold feature
  ext4: remove redundant checks of s_encoding
  libfs: remove redundant checks of s_encoding

 fs/ext4/hash.c  |  2 +-
 fs/ext4/inode.c |  5 ++++-
 fs/ext4/namei.c |  6 +++---
 fs/libfs.c      | 14 ++------------
 4 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)


base-commit: 2ccdd1b13c591d306f0401d98dedc4bdcd02b421
-- 
2.41.0

[f2fs-dev] [PATCH 0/3] Simplify rejection of unexpected casefold inode flag

[Eric Biggers]

This series makes unexpected casefold flags on inodes be consistently
rejected early on so that additional validation isn't needed later on
during random filesystem operations.  For additional context, refer to
the discussion on patch 1 of
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20230812004146.30980-1-krisman@suse.de/T/#u

Applies to v6.5-rc6

Eric Biggers (3):
  ext4: reject casefold inode flag without casefold feature
  ext4: remove redundant checks of s_encoding
  libfs: remove redundant checks of s_encoding

 fs/ext4/hash.c  |  2 +-
 fs/ext4/inode.c |  5 ++++-
 fs/ext4/namei.c |  6 +++---
 fs/libfs.c      | 14 ++------------
 4 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)


base-commit: 2ccdd1b13c591d306f0401d98dedc4bdcd02b421
-- 
2.41.0



_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

[PATCH 1/3] ext4: reject casefold inode flag without casefold feature

[Eric Biggers]

From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>

It is invalid for the casefold inode flag to be set without the casefold
superblock feature flag also being set.  e2fsck already considers this
case to be invalid and handles it by offering to clear the casefold flag
on the inode.  __ext4_iget() also already considered this to be invalid,
sort of, but it only got so far as logging an error message; it didn't
actually reject the inode.  Make it reject the inode so that other code
doesn't have to handle this case.  This matches what f2fs does.

Note: we could check 's_encoding != NULL' instead of
ext4_has_feature_casefold().  This would make the check robust against
the casefold feature being enabled by userspace writing to the page
cache of the mounted block device.  However, it's unsolvable in general
for filesystems to be robust against concurrent writes to the page cache
of the mounted block device.  Though this very particular scenario
involving the casefold feature is solvable, we should not pretend that
we can support this model, so let's just check the casefold feature.
tune2fs already forbids enabling casefold on a mounted filesystem.

Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
---
 fs/ext4/inode.c | 5 ++++-
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
index 43775a6ca505..390dedbb7e8a 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
@@ -4940,9 +4940,12 @@ struct inode *__ext4_iget(struct super_block *sb, unsigned long ino,
 				 "iget: bogus i_mode (%o)", inode->i_mode);
 		goto bad_inode;
 	}
-	if (IS_CASEFOLDED(inode) && !ext4_has_feature_casefold(inode->i_sb))
+	if (IS_CASEFOLDED(inode) && !ext4_has_feature_casefold(inode->i_sb)) {
 		ext4_error_inode(inode, function, line, 0,
 				 "casefold flag without casefold feature");
+		ret = -EFSCORRUPTED;
+		goto bad_inode;
+	}
 	if ((err_str = check_igot_inode(inode, flags)) != NULL) {
 		ext4_error_inode(inode, function, line, 0, err_str);
 		ret = -EFSCORRUPTED;
-- 
2.41.0

[f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/3] ext4: reject casefold inode flag without casefold feature

[Eric Biggers]

From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>

It is invalid for the casefold inode flag to be set without the casefold
superblock feature flag also being set.  e2fsck already considers this
case to be invalid and handles it by offering to clear the casefold flag
on the inode.  __ext4_iget() also already considered this to be invalid,
sort of, but it only got so far as logging an error message; it didn't
actually reject the inode.  Make it reject the inode so that other code
doesn't have to handle this case.  This matches what f2fs does.

Note: we could check 's_encoding != NULL' instead of
ext4_has_feature_casefold().  This would make the check robust against
the casefold feature being enabled by userspace writing to the page
cache of the mounted block device.  However, it's unsolvable in general
for filesystems to be robust against concurrent writes to the page cache
of the mounted block device.  Though this very particular scenario
involving the casefold feature is solvable, we should not pretend that
we can support this model, so let's just check the casefold feature.
tune2fs already forbids enabling casefold on a mounted filesystem.

Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
---
 fs/ext4/inode.c | 5 ++++-
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
index 43775a6ca505..390dedbb7e8a 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
@@ -4940,9 +4940,12 @@ struct inode *__ext4_iget(struct super_block *sb, unsigned long ino,
 				 "iget: bogus i_mode (%o)", inode->i_mode);
 		goto bad_inode;
 	}
-	if (IS_CASEFOLDED(inode) && !ext4_has_feature_casefold(inode->i_sb))
+	if (IS_CASEFOLDED(inode) && !ext4_has_feature_casefold(inode->i_sb)) {
 		ext4_error_inode(inode, function, line, 0,
 				 "casefold flag without casefold feature");
+		ret = -EFSCORRUPTED;
+		goto bad_inode;
+	}
 	if ((err_str = check_igot_inode(inode, flags)) != NULL) {
 		ext4_error_inode(inode, function, line, 0, err_str);
 		ret = -EFSCORRUPTED;
-- 
2.41.0



_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

Re: [PATCH 1/3] ext4: reject casefold inode flag without casefold feature

[Gabriel Krisman Bertazi]

Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> writes:

> From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
>
> It is invalid for the casefold inode flag to be set without the casefold
> superblock feature flag also being set.  e2fsck already considers this
> case to be invalid and handles it by offering to clear the casefold flag
> on the inode.  __ext4_iget() also already considered this to be invalid,
> sort of, but it only got so far as logging an error message; it didn't
> actually reject the inode.  Make it reject the inode so that other code
> doesn't have to handle this case.  This matches what f2fs does.
>
> Note: we could check 's_encoding != NULL' instead of
> ext4_has_feature_casefold().  This would make the check robust against
> the casefold feature being enabled by userspace writing to the page
> cache of the mounted block device.  However, it's unsolvable in general
> for filesystems to be robust against concurrent writes to the page cache
> of the mounted block device.  Though this very particular scenario
> involving the casefold feature is solvable, we should not pretend that
> we can support this model, so let's just check the casefold feature.
> tune2fs already forbids enabling casefold on a mounted filesystem.

just because we can't fix the general issue for the entire filesystem
doesn't mean this case *must not* ever be addressed. What is the
advantage of making the code less robust against the syzbot code?  Just
check sb->s_encoding and be safe later knowing the unicode map is
available.

>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
> ---
>  fs/ext4/inode.c | 5 ++++-
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> index 43775a6ca505..390dedbb7e8a 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> @@ -4940,9 +4940,12 @@ struct inode *__ext4_iget(struct super_block *sb, unsigned long ino,
>  				 "iget: bogus i_mode (%o)", inode->i_mode);
>  		goto bad_inode;
>  	}
> -	if (IS_CASEFOLDED(inode) && !ext4_has_feature_casefold(inode->i_sb))
> +	if (IS_CASEFOLDED(inode) && !ext4_has_feature_casefold(inode->i_sb)) {
>  		ext4_error_inode(inode, function, line, 0,
>  				 "casefold flag without casefold feature");
> +		ret = -EFSCORRUPTED;
> +		goto bad_inode;
> +	}
>  	if ((err_str = check_igot_inode(inode, flags)) != NULL) {
>  		ext4_error_inode(inode, function, line, 0, err_str);
>  		ret = -EFSCORRUPTED;

-- 
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi

Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/3] ext4: reject casefold inode flag without casefold feature

[Gabriel Krisman Bertazi]

Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> writes:

> From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
>
> It is invalid for the casefold inode flag to be set without the casefold
> superblock feature flag also being set.  e2fsck already considers this
> case to be invalid and handles it by offering to clear the casefold flag
> on the inode.  __ext4_iget() also already considered this to be invalid,
> sort of, but it only got so far as logging an error message; it didn't
> actually reject the inode.  Make it reject the inode so that other code
> doesn't have to handle this case.  This matches what f2fs does.
>
> Note: we could check 's_encoding != NULL' instead of
> ext4_has_feature_casefold().  This would make the check robust against
> the casefold feature being enabled by userspace writing to the page
> cache of the mounted block device.  However, it's unsolvable in general
> for filesystems to be robust against concurrent writes to the page cache
> of the mounted block device.  Though this very particular scenario
> involving the casefold feature is solvable, we should not pretend that
> we can support this model, so let's just check the casefold feature.
> tune2fs already forbids enabling casefold on a mounted filesystem.

just because we can't fix the general issue for the entire filesystem
doesn't mean this case *must not* ever be addressed. What is the
advantage of making the code less robust against the syzbot code?  Just
check sb->s_encoding and be safe later knowing the unicode map is
available.

>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
> ---
>  fs/ext4/inode.c | 5 ++++-
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> index 43775a6ca505..390dedbb7e8a 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> @@ -4940,9 +4940,12 @@ struct inode *__ext4_iget(struct super_block *sb, unsigned long ino,
>  				 "iget: bogus i_mode (%o)", inode->i_mode);
>  		goto bad_inode;
>  	}
> -	if (IS_CASEFOLDED(inode) && !ext4_has_feature_casefold(inode->i_sb))
> +	if (IS_CASEFOLDED(inode) && !ext4_has_feature_casefold(inode->i_sb)) {
>  		ext4_error_inode(inode, function, line, 0,
>  				 "casefold flag without casefold feature");
> +		ret = -EFSCORRUPTED;
> +		goto bad_inode;
> +	}
>  	if ((err_str = check_igot_inode(inode, flags)) != NULL) {
>  		ext4_error_inode(inode, function, line, 0, err_str);
>  		ret = -EFSCORRUPTED;

-- 
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi


_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

Re: [PATCH 1/3] ext4: reject casefold inode flag without casefold feature

[Eric Biggers]

On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 03:09:33PM -0400, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
> Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> writes:
> 
> > From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
> >
> > It is invalid for the casefold inode flag to be set without the casefold
> > superblock feature flag also being set.  e2fsck already considers this
> > case to be invalid and handles it by offering to clear the casefold flag
> > on the inode.  __ext4_iget() also already considered this to be invalid,
> > sort of, but it only got so far as logging an error message; it didn't
> > actually reject the inode.  Make it reject the inode so that other code
> > doesn't have to handle this case.  This matches what f2fs does.
> >
> > Note: we could check 's_encoding != NULL' instead of
> > ext4_has_feature_casefold().  This would make the check robust against
> > the casefold feature being enabled by userspace writing to the page
> > cache of the mounted block device.  However, it's unsolvable in general
> > for filesystems to be robust against concurrent writes to the page cache
> > of the mounted block device.  Though this very particular scenario
> > involving the casefold feature is solvable, we should not pretend that
> > we can support this model, so let's just check the casefold feature.
> > tune2fs already forbids enabling casefold on a mounted filesystem.
> 
> just because we can't fix the general issue for the entire filesystem
> doesn't mean this case *must not* ever be addressed. What is the
> advantage of making the code less robust against the syzbot code?  Just
> check sb->s_encoding and be safe later knowing the unicode map is
> available.
> 

Just to make sure, it sounds like you agree that the late checks of ->s_encoding
are not needed and only __ext4_iget() should handle it, right?  That simplifies
the code so it is obviously beneficial if we can do it.

As for whether __ext4_iget() should check the casefold feature or ->s_encoding,
we should simply go with the one that makes the code clearer, as per what I've
said.  I think it's casefold, but it could be ->s_encoding if others prefer.

- Eric

Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/3] ext4: reject casefold inode flag without casefold feature

[Eric Biggers]

On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 03:09:33PM -0400, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
> Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> writes:
> 
> > From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
> >
> > It is invalid for the casefold inode flag to be set without the casefold
> > superblock feature flag also being set.  e2fsck already considers this
> > case to be invalid and handles it by offering to clear the casefold flag
> > on the inode.  __ext4_iget() also already considered this to be invalid,
> > sort of, but it only got so far as logging an error message; it didn't
> > actually reject the inode.  Make it reject the inode so that other code
> > doesn't have to handle this case.  This matches what f2fs does.
> >
> > Note: we could check 's_encoding != NULL' instead of
> > ext4_has_feature_casefold().  This would make the check robust against
> > the casefold feature being enabled by userspace writing to the page
> > cache of the mounted block device.  However, it's unsolvable in general
> > for filesystems to be robust against concurrent writes to the page cache
> > of the mounted block device.  Though this very particular scenario
> > involving the casefold feature is solvable, we should not pretend that
> > we can support this model, so let's just check the casefold feature.
> > tune2fs already forbids enabling casefold on a mounted filesystem.
> 
> just because we can't fix the general issue for the entire filesystem
> doesn't mean this case *must not* ever be addressed. What is the
> advantage of making the code less robust against the syzbot code?  Just
> check sb->s_encoding and be safe later knowing the unicode map is
> available.
> 

Just to make sure, it sounds like you agree that the late checks of ->s_encoding
are not needed and only __ext4_iget() should handle it, right?  That simplifies
the code so it is obviously beneficial if we can do it.

As for whether __ext4_iget() should check the casefold feature or ->s_encoding,
we should simply go with the one that makes the code clearer, as per what I've
said.  I think it's casefold, but it could be ->s_encoding if others prefer.

- Eric


_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

Re: [PATCH 1/3] ext4: reject casefold inode flag without casefold feature

[Gabriel Krisman Bertazi]

Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> writes:

> On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 03:09:33PM -0400, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
>> Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> writes:
>> 
>> > From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
>> >
>> > It is invalid for the casefold inode flag to be set without the casefold
>> > superblock feature flag also being set.  e2fsck already considers this
>> > case to be invalid and handles it by offering to clear the casefold flag
>> > on the inode.  __ext4_iget() also already considered this to be invalid,
>> > sort of, but it only got so far as logging an error message; it didn't
>> > actually reject the inode.  Make it reject the inode so that other code
>> > doesn't have to handle this case.  This matches what f2fs does.
>> >
>> > Note: we could check 's_encoding != NULL' instead of
>> > ext4_has_feature_casefold().  This would make the check robust against
>> > the casefold feature being enabled by userspace writing to the page
>> > cache of the mounted block device.  However, it's unsolvable in general
>> > for filesystems to be robust against concurrent writes to the page cache
>> > of the mounted block device.  Though this very particular scenario
>> > involving the casefold feature is solvable, we should not pretend that
>> > we can support this model, so let's just check the casefold feature.
>> > tune2fs already forbids enabling casefold on a mounted filesystem.
>> 
>> just because we can't fix the general issue for the entire filesystem
>> doesn't mean this case *must not* ever be addressed. What is the
>> advantage of making the code less robust against the syzbot code?  Just
>> check sb->s_encoding and be safe later knowing the unicode map is
>> available.
>> 
>
> Just to make sure, it sounds like you agree that the late checks of ->s_encoding
> are not needed and only __ext4_iget() should handle it, right?  That simplifies
> the code so it is obviously beneficial if we can do it.

Yes.  After we get the inode from __ext4_iget, I think it doesn't matter
if the user went behind our back straight to the block device and
changed the superblock to remove the feature bit. If we already loaded
->s_encoding, it won't be unloaded, so only checking at ext4_iget should
be enough, as far as I can tell.


-- 
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi

Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/3] ext4: reject casefold inode flag without casefold feature

[Gabriel Krisman Bertazi]

Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> writes:

> On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 03:09:33PM -0400, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
>> Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> writes:
>> 
>> > From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
>> >
>> > It is invalid for the casefold inode flag to be set without the casefold
>> > superblock feature flag also being set.  e2fsck already considers this
>> > case to be invalid and handles it by offering to clear the casefold flag
>> > on the inode.  __ext4_iget() also already considered this to be invalid,
>> > sort of, but it only got so far as logging an error message; it didn't
>> > actually reject the inode.  Make it reject the inode so that other code
>> > doesn't have to handle this case.  This matches what f2fs does.
>> >
>> > Note: we could check 's_encoding != NULL' instead of
>> > ext4_has_feature_casefold().  This would make the check robust against
>> > the casefold feature being enabled by userspace writing to the page
>> > cache of the mounted block device.  However, it's unsolvable in general
>> > for filesystems to be robust against concurrent writes to the page cache
>> > of the mounted block device.  Though this very particular scenario
>> > involving the casefold feature is solvable, we should not pretend that
>> > we can support this model, so let's just check the casefold feature.
>> > tune2fs already forbids enabling casefold on a mounted filesystem.
>> 
>> just because we can't fix the general issue for the entire filesystem
>> doesn't mean this case *must not* ever be addressed. What is the
>> advantage of making the code less robust against the syzbot code?  Just
>> check sb->s_encoding and be safe later knowing the unicode map is
>> available.
>> 
>
> Just to make sure, it sounds like you agree that the late checks of ->s_encoding
> are not needed and only __ext4_iget() should handle it, right?  That simplifies
> the code so it is obviously beneficial if we can do it.

Yes.  After we get the inode from __ext4_iget, I think it doesn't matter
if the user went behind our back straight to the block device and
changed the superblock to remove the feature bit. If we already loaded
->s_encoding, it won't be unloaded, so only checking at ext4_iget should
be enough, as far as I can tell.


-- 
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi


_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

[PATCH 2/3] ext4: remove redundant checks of s_encoding

[Eric Biggers]

From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>

Now that ext4 does not allow inodes with the casefold flag to be
instantiated when unsupported, it's unnecessary to repeatedly check for
support later on during random filesystem operations.

Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
---
 fs/ext4/hash.c  | 2 +-
 fs/ext4/namei.c | 6 +++---
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext4/hash.c b/fs/ext4/hash.c
index 46c3423ddfa1..deabe29da7fb 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/hash.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/hash.c
@@ -300,7 +300,7 @@ int ext4fs_dirhash(const struct inode *dir, const char *name, int len,
 	unsigned char *buff;
 	struct qstr qstr = {.name = name, .len = len };
 
-	if (len && IS_CASEFOLDED(dir) && um &&
+	if (len && IS_CASEFOLDED(dir) &&
 	   (!IS_ENCRYPTED(dir) || fscrypt_has_encryption_key(dir))) {
 		buff = kzalloc(sizeof(char) * PATH_MAX, GFP_KERNEL);
 		if (!buff)
diff --git a/fs/ext4/namei.c b/fs/ext4/namei.c
index 0caf6c730ce3..f9a5663b9d23 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/namei.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/namei.c
@@ -1445,7 +1445,7 @@ int ext4_fname_setup_ci_filename(struct inode *dir, const struct qstr *iname,
 	struct dx_hash_info *hinfo = &name->hinfo;
 	int len;
 
-	if (!IS_CASEFOLDED(dir) || !dir->i_sb->s_encoding ||
+	if (!IS_CASEFOLDED(dir) ||
 	    (IS_ENCRYPTED(dir) && !fscrypt_has_encryption_key(dir))) {
 		cf_name->name = NULL;
 		return 0;
@@ -1496,7 +1496,7 @@ static bool ext4_match(struct inode *parent,
 #endif
 
 #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_UNICODE)
-	if (parent->i_sb->s_encoding && IS_CASEFOLDED(parent) &&
+	if (IS_CASEFOLDED(parent) &&
 	    (!IS_ENCRYPTED(parent) || fscrypt_has_encryption_key(parent))) {
 		if (fname->cf_name.name) {
 			struct qstr cf = {.name = fname->cf_name.name,
@@ -2393,7 +2393,7 @@ static int ext4_add_entry(handle_t *handle, struct dentry *dentry,
 
 #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_UNICODE)
 	if (sb_has_strict_encoding(sb) && IS_CASEFOLDED(dir) &&
-	    sb->s_encoding && utf8_validate(sb->s_encoding, &dentry->d_name))
+	    utf8_validate(sb->s_encoding, &dentry->d_name))
 		return -EINVAL;
 #endif
 
-- 
2.41.0

[f2fs-dev] [PATCH 2/3] ext4: remove redundant checks of s_encoding

[Eric Biggers]

From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>

Now that ext4 does not allow inodes with the casefold flag to be
instantiated when unsupported, it's unnecessary to repeatedly check for
support later on during random filesystem operations.

Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
---
 fs/ext4/hash.c  | 2 +-
 fs/ext4/namei.c | 6 +++---
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext4/hash.c b/fs/ext4/hash.c
index 46c3423ddfa1..deabe29da7fb 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/hash.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/hash.c
@@ -300,7 +300,7 @@ int ext4fs_dirhash(const struct inode *dir, const char *name, int len,
 	unsigned char *buff;
 	struct qstr qstr = {.name = name, .len = len };
 
-	if (len && IS_CASEFOLDED(dir) && um &&
+	if (len && IS_CASEFOLDED(dir) &&
 	   (!IS_ENCRYPTED(dir) || fscrypt_has_encryption_key(dir))) {
 		buff = kzalloc(sizeof(char) * PATH_MAX, GFP_KERNEL);
 		if (!buff)
diff --git a/fs/ext4/namei.c b/fs/ext4/namei.c
index 0caf6c730ce3..f9a5663b9d23 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/namei.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/namei.c
@@ -1445,7 +1445,7 @@ int ext4_fname_setup_ci_filename(struct inode *dir, const struct qstr *iname,
 	struct dx_hash_info *hinfo = &name->hinfo;
 	int len;
 
-	if (!IS_CASEFOLDED(dir) || !dir->i_sb->s_encoding ||
+	if (!IS_CASEFOLDED(dir) ||
 	    (IS_ENCRYPTED(dir) && !fscrypt_has_encryption_key(dir))) {
 		cf_name->name = NULL;
 		return 0;
@@ -1496,7 +1496,7 @@ static bool ext4_match(struct inode *parent,
 #endif
 
 #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_UNICODE)
-	if (parent->i_sb->s_encoding && IS_CASEFOLDED(parent) &&
+	if (IS_CASEFOLDED(parent) &&
 	    (!IS_ENCRYPTED(parent) || fscrypt_has_encryption_key(parent))) {
 		if (fname->cf_name.name) {
 			struct qstr cf = {.name = fname->cf_name.name,
@@ -2393,7 +2393,7 @@ static int ext4_add_entry(handle_t *handle, struct dentry *dentry,
 
 #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_UNICODE)
 	if (sb_has_strict_encoding(sb) && IS_CASEFOLDED(dir) &&
-	    sb->s_encoding && utf8_validate(sb->s_encoding, &dentry->d_name))
+	    utf8_validate(sb->s_encoding, &dentry->d_name))
 		return -EINVAL;
 #endif
 
-- 
2.41.0



_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

[PATCH 3/3] libfs: remove redundant checks of s_encoding

[Eric Biggers]

From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>

Now that neither ext4 nor f2fs allows inodes with the casefold flag to
be instantiated when unsupported, it's unnecessary to repeatedly check
for support later on during random filesystem operations.

Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
---
 fs/libfs.c | 14 ++------------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/libfs.c b/fs/libfs.c
index 5b851315eeed..5197ea8c66d3 100644
--- a/fs/libfs.c
+++ b/fs/libfs.c
@@ -1381,16 +1381,6 @@ bool is_empty_dir_inode(struct inode *inode)
 }
 
 #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_UNICODE)
-/*
- * Determine if the name of a dentry should be casefolded.
- *
- * Return: if names will need casefolding
- */
-static bool needs_casefold(const struct inode *dir)
-{
-	return IS_CASEFOLDED(dir) && dir->i_sb->s_encoding;
-}
-
 /**
  * generic_ci_d_compare - generic d_compare implementation for casefolding filesystems
  * @dentry:	dentry whose name we are checking against
@@ -1411,7 +1401,7 @@ static int generic_ci_d_compare(const struct dentry *dentry, unsigned int len,
 	char strbuf[DNAME_INLINE_LEN];
 	int ret;
 
-	if (!dir || !needs_casefold(dir))
+	if (!dir || !IS_CASEFOLDED(dir))
 		goto fallback;
 	/*
 	 * If the dentry name is stored in-line, then it may be concurrently
@@ -1453,7 +1443,7 @@ static int generic_ci_d_hash(const struct dentry *dentry, struct qstr *str)
 	const struct unicode_map *um = sb->s_encoding;
 	int ret = 0;
 
-	if (!dir || !needs_casefold(dir))
+	if (!dir || !IS_CASEFOLDED(dir))
 		return 0;
 
 	ret = utf8_casefold_hash(um, dentry, str);
-- 
2.41.0

[f2fs-dev] [PATCH 3/3] libfs: remove redundant checks of s_encoding

[Eric Biggers]

From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>

Now that neither ext4 nor f2fs allows inodes with the casefold flag to
be instantiated when unsupported, it's unnecessary to repeatedly check
for support later on during random filesystem operations.

Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
---
 fs/libfs.c | 14 ++------------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/libfs.c b/fs/libfs.c
index 5b851315eeed..5197ea8c66d3 100644
--- a/fs/libfs.c
+++ b/fs/libfs.c
@@ -1381,16 +1381,6 @@ bool is_empty_dir_inode(struct inode *inode)
 }
 
 #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_UNICODE)
-/*
- * Determine if the name of a dentry should be casefolded.
- *
- * Return: if names will need casefolding
- */
-static bool needs_casefold(const struct inode *dir)
-{
-	return IS_CASEFOLDED(dir) && dir->i_sb->s_encoding;
-}
-
 /**
  * generic_ci_d_compare - generic d_compare implementation for casefolding filesystems
  * @dentry:	dentry whose name we are checking against
@@ -1411,7 +1401,7 @@ static int generic_ci_d_compare(const struct dentry *dentry, unsigned int len,
 	char strbuf[DNAME_INLINE_LEN];
 	int ret;
 
-	if (!dir || !needs_casefold(dir))
+	if (!dir || !IS_CASEFOLDED(dir))
 		goto fallback;
 	/*
 	 * If the dentry name is stored in-line, then it may be concurrently
@@ -1453,7 +1443,7 @@ static int generic_ci_d_hash(const struct dentry *dentry, struct qstr *str)
 	const struct unicode_map *um = sb->s_encoding;
 	int ret = 0;
 
-	if (!dir || !needs_casefold(dir))
+	if (!dir || !IS_CASEFOLDED(dir))
 		return 0;
 
 	ret = utf8_casefold_hash(um, dentry, str);
-- 
2.41.0



_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

Re: [PATCH 0/3] Simplify rejection of unexpected casefold inode flag

[Theodore Ts'o]

On Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:29:00 -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> This series makes unexpected casefold flags on inodes be consistently
> rejected early on so that additional validation isn't needed later on
> during random filesystem operations.  For additional context, refer to
> the discussion on patch 1 of
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20230812004146.30980-1-krisman@suse.de/T/#u
> 
> Applies to v6.5-rc6
> 
> [...]

Applied, thanks!

[1/3] ext4: reject casefold inode flag without casefold feature
      commit: 3d0f06b5a4e6d09b4a27d701f2ec9a7de8dadbe5
[2/3] ext4: remove redundant checks of s_encoding
      commit: fe9ef4ceae694597fe7318aafd7357cc5b85724e
[3/3] libfs: remove redundant checks of s_encoding
      commit: 6d7772c4427aaa21251c629d4fabb17e5c10a463

Best regards,
-- 
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>

Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 0/3] Simplify rejection of unexpected casefold inode flag

[Theodore Ts'o]

On Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:29:00 -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> This series makes unexpected casefold flags on inodes be consistently
> rejected early on so that additional validation isn't needed later on
> during random filesystem operations.  For additional context, refer to
> the discussion on patch 1 of
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20230812004146.30980-1-krisman@suse.de/T/#u
> 
> Applies to v6.5-rc6
> 
> [...]

Applied, thanks!

[1/3] ext4: reject casefold inode flag without casefold feature
      commit: 3d0f06b5a4e6d09b4a27d701f2ec9a7de8dadbe5
[2/3] ext4: remove redundant checks of s_encoding
      commit: fe9ef4ceae694597fe7318aafd7357cc5b85724e
[3/3] libfs: remove redundant checks of s_encoding
      commit: 6d7772c4427aaa21251c629d4fabb17e5c10a463

Best regards,
-- 
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>


_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 0/3] Simplify rejection of unexpected casefold inode flag

[patchwork-bot+f2fs]

Hello:

This series was applied to jaegeuk/f2fs.git (dev)
by Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>:

On Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:29:00 -0700 you wrote:
> This series makes unexpected casefold flags on inodes be consistently
> rejected early on so that additional validation isn't needed later on
> during random filesystem operations.  For additional context, refer to
> the discussion on patch 1 of
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20230812004146.30980-1-krisman@suse.de/T/#u
> 
> Applies to v6.5-rc6
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - [f2fs-dev,1/3] ext4: reject casefold inode flag without casefold feature
    https://git.kernel.org/jaegeuk/f2fs/c/8216776ccff6
  - [f2fs-dev,2/3] ext4: remove redundant checks of s_encoding
    https://git.kernel.org/jaegeuk/f2fs/c/b81427939590
  - [f2fs-dev,3/3] libfs: remove redundant checks of s_encoding
    https://git.kernel.org/jaegeuk/f2fs/c/af494af38580

You are awesome, thank you!
-- 
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html

Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 0/3] Simplify rejection of unexpected casefold inode flag

[patchwork-bot+f2fs]

Hello:

This series was applied to jaegeuk/f2fs.git (dev)
by Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>:

On Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:29:00 -0700 you wrote:
> This series makes unexpected casefold flags on inodes be consistently
> rejected early on so that additional validation isn't needed later on
> during random filesystem operations.  For additional context, refer to
> the discussion on patch 1 of
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20230812004146.30980-1-krisman@suse.de/T/#u
> 
> Applies to v6.5-rc6
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - [f2fs-dev,1/3] ext4: reject casefold inode flag without casefold feature
    https://git.kernel.org/jaegeuk/f2fs/c/8216776ccff6
  - [f2fs-dev,2/3] ext4: remove redundant checks of s_encoding
    https://git.kernel.org/jaegeuk/f2fs/c/b81427939590
  - [f2fs-dev,3/3] libfs: remove redundant checks of s_encoding
    https://git.kernel.org/jaegeuk/f2fs/c/af494af38580

You are awesome, thank you!
-- 
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html




_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel