From: Baokun Li <libaokun@linux.alibaba.com>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] ext4: handle wraparound when searching for blocks for indirect mapped blocks
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2026 18:01:31 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a2ba82d0-c0b3-4664-aab6-04615ef316db@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260326045834.1175822-1-tytso@mit.edu>
On 3/26/26 12:58 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> Commit 4865c768b563 ("ext4: always allocate blocks only from groups
> inode can use") restricts what blocks will be allocated for indirect
> block based files to block numbers that fit within 32-bit block
> numbers.
>
> However, when using a review bot running on the latest Gemini LLM to
> check this commit when backporting into an LTS based kernel, it raised
> this concern:
>
> If ac->ac_g_ex.fe_group is >= ngroups (for instance, if the goal
> group was populated via stream allocation from s_mb_last_groups),
> then start will be >= ngroups.
>
> Does this allow allocating blocks beyond the 32-bit limit for
> indirect block mapped files? The commit message mentions that
> ext4_mb_scan_groups_linear() takes care to not select unsupported
> groups. However, its loop uses group = *start, and the very first
> iteration will call ext4_mb_scan_group() with this unsupported
> group because next_linear_group() is only called at the end of the
> iteration.
>
> After reviewing the code paths involved and considering the LLM
> review, I determined that this can happen when there is a file system
> where some files/directories are extent-mapped and others are
> indirect-block mapped. To address this, add a safety clamp in
> ext4_mb_scan_groups().
>
> Fixes: 4865c768b563 ("ext4: always allocate blocks only from groups inode can use")
> Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
> Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Baokun Li <libaokun@linux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> v2:
> * Remove extra checks that were not needed once we add the clamp
> in ext4_mb_scan_groups().
>
> fs/ext4/mballoc.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> index 20e9fdaf4301..b10db5d7545b 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> @@ -1199,6 +1199,8 @@ static int ext4_mb_scan_groups(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac)
>
> /* searching for the right group start from the goal value specified */
> start = ac->ac_g_ex.fe_group;
> + if (start >= ngroups)
> + start = 0;
> ac->ac_prefetch_grp = start;
> ac->ac_prefetch_nr = 0;
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-26 10:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-26 4:58 [PATCH -v2] ext4: handle wraparound when searching for blocks for indirect mapped blocks Theodore Ts'o
2026-03-26 9:44 ` Jan Kara
2026-03-26 10:01 ` Baokun Li [this message]
2026-03-28 5:31 ` 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=a2ba82d0-c0b3-4664-aab6-04615ef316db@linux.alibaba.com \
--to=libaokun@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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