From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Subject: [PATCH] ext4: avoid possible overflow in ext4_map_blocks()
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 00:50:54 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1392875454-4281-1-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> (raw)
The ext4_map_blocks() function returns the number of blocks which
satisfying the caller's request. This number of blocks requested by
the caller is specified by an unsigned integer, but the return value
of ext4_map_blocks() is a signed integer (to accomodate error codes
per the kernel's standard error signalling convention).
Historically, overflows could never happen since mballoc() will refuse
to allocate more than 2048 blocks at a time (which is something we
should fix), and if the blocks were already allocated, the fact that
there would be some number of intervening metadata blocks pretty much
guaranteed that there could never be a contiguous region of data
blocks that was greater than 2**31 blocks.
However, this is now possible if there is a file system which is a bit
bigger than 8TB, and is created using the new mke2fs hugeblock
feature, which can create a perfectly contiguous file. In that case,
if a userspace program attempted to call fallocate() on this already
fully allocated file, it's possible that ext4_map_blocks() could
return a number large enough that it would overflow a signed integer,
resultimg in a ext4 thinking that the ext4_map_blocks() call had
failed with some strange error code.
Since ext4_map_blocks() is always free to return a smaller number of
blocks than what was requested by the caller, fix this by capping the
number of blocks that ext4_map_blocks() will ever try to map to 2**31
- 1. In practice this should never get hit, except by someone
deliberately trying to provke the above-described bug.
Thanks to the PaX team for asking whethre this could possibly happen
in some off-line discussions about using some static code checking
technology they are developing to find bugs in kernel code.
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
---
fs/ext4/inode.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
index 6e39895..e81244d 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
@@ -514,6 +514,9 @@ int ext4_map_blocks(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode,
"logical block %lu\n", inode->i_ino, flags, map->m_len,
(unsigned long) map->m_lblk);
+ if (map->m_len >= (1UL << 31))
+ map->m_len = (1UL << 31) - 1;
+
/* Lookup extent status tree firstly */
if (ext4_es_lookup_extent(inode, map->m_lblk, &es)) {
ext4_es_lru_add(inode);
--
1.9.0
next reply other threads:[~2014-02-20 5:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-20 5:50 Theodore Ts'o [this message]
2014-02-20 6:11 ` [PATCH] ext4: avoid possible overflow in ext4_map_blocks() Andreas Dilger
2014-02-20 17:59 ` [PATCH -v2] " Theodore Ts'o
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=1392875454-4281-1-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=linux-ext4@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).