From: Viacheslav Dubeyko <vdubeyko@redhat.com>
To: Edward Adam Davis <eadavis@qq.com>,
syzbot+217eb327242d08197efb@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Cc: frank.li@vivo.com, glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
slava@dubeyko.com, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hfsplus: Add a sanity check for catalog btree node size
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2026 15:32:59 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <646f4e41c5b0ae14fa755f75fbe83837308ee35f.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <tencent_1E9E3B1B234BA11B762595BA40BBFE33C608@qq.com>
On Wed, 2026-04-15 at 16:29 +0800, Edward Adam Davis wrote:
> Syzbot reported a uninit-value bug in [1], during the file system mounting
> process, specifically while loading the catalog, a corrupted node_size
> value of 1 caused the rec_off argument passed to hfs_bnode_read_u16()
> (within hfs_bnode_find()) to be excessively large. Consequently, the
> function failed to return a valid value to initialize the off variable,
> triggering the bug [1].
>
> To prevent similar issues, a check for the catalog btree node size has
> been added within the hfsplus_btree_open() function.
>
> [1]
> BUG: KMSAN: uninit-value in hfsplus_bnode_find+0x141c/0x1600 fs/hfsplus/bnode.c:584
> hfsplus_bnode_find+0x141c/0x1600 fs/hfsplus/bnode.c:584
> hfsplus_btree_open+0x169a/0x1e40 fs/hfsplus/btree.c:382
> hfsplus_fill_super+0x111f/0x2770 fs/hfsplus/super.c:553
> get_tree_bdev_flags+0x6e6/0x920 fs/super.c:1694
> get_tree_bdev+0x38/0x50 fs/super.c:1717
> hfsplus_get_tree+0x35/0x40 fs/hfsplus/super.c:709
> vfs_get_tree+0xb3/0x5d0 fs/super.c:1754
> fc_mount fs/namespace.c:1193 [inline]
>
> Fixes: 8ad2c6a36ac4 ("hfsplus: validate b-tree node 0 bitmap at mount time")
> Reported-by: syzbot+217eb327242d08197efb@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=217eb327242d08197efb
> Signed-off-by: Edward Adam Davis <eadavis@qq.com>
> ---
> fs/hfsplus/btree.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/hfsplus/btree.c b/fs/hfsplus/btree.c
> index 761c74ccd653..61050ffe425e 100644
> --- a/fs/hfsplus/btree.c
> +++ b/fs/hfsplus/btree.c
> @@ -337,6 +337,11 @@ struct hfs_btree *hfs_btree_open(struct super_block *sb, u32 id)
> pr_err("invalid catalog btree flag\n");
> goto fail_page;
> }
> + if (tree->node_size < 2) {
Every node starts from BTree node descriptor: struct hfs_bnode_desc. So, the
size of node cannot be lesser than that. However, technical specification
declares that: "The node size (which is expressed in bytes) must be power of
two, from 512 through 32,768, inclusive.". So, we can add more smart check here.
And, maybe, it makes sense to check the node size value at the places of using
it. What do you think?
But we have this check of node_size in hfs_btree_open() [1]:
size = tree->node_size;
if (!is_power_of_2(size))
goto fail_page;
If node size is 1, for example, then this check should fail to execute the
hfs_btree_open(). How, finally, do we have node_size == 1 during the
hfs_bnode_find()? I don't quite follow.
Thanks,
Slava.
> + pr_err("invalid catalog btree node size %u\n",
> + tree->node_size);
> + goto fail_page;
> + }
>
> if (test_bit(HFSPLUS_SB_HFSX, &HFSPLUS_SB(sb)->flags) &&
> (head->key_type == HFSPLUS_KEY_BINARY))
[1] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v7.0/source/fs/hfsplus/btree.c#L232
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-15 22:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-14 23:20 [syzbot] [hfs?] KMSAN: uninit-value in hfsplus_bnode_find syzbot
2026-04-15 8:29 ` [PATCH] hfsplus: Add a sanity check for catalog btree node size Edward Adam Davis
2026-04-15 22:32 ` Viacheslav Dubeyko [this message]
2026-04-16 4:09 ` Edward Adam Davis
2026-04-16 9:53 ` [PATCH v2] hfsplus: Add a sanity check for " Edward Adam Davis
2026-04-16 22:16 ` Viacheslav Dubeyko
2026-04-16 23:38 ` Edward Adam Davis
2026-04-16 23:44 ` [PATCH v3] " Edward Adam Davis
2026-04-16 23:52 ` Viacheslav Dubeyko
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=646f4e41c5b0ae14fa755f75fbe83837308ee35f.camel@redhat.com \
--to=vdubeyko@redhat.com \
--cc=eadavis@qq.com \
--cc=frank.li@vivo.com \
--cc=glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=slava@dubeyko.com \
--cc=syzbot+217eb327242d08197efb@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
--cc=syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox