From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Raphael Pinsonneault-Thibeault <rpthibeault@gmail.com>
Cc: cem@kernel.org, chandanbabu@kernel.org, bfoster@redhat.com,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linux.dev, skhan@linuxfoundation.org,
syzbot+9f6d080dece587cfdd4c@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: reject log records with v2 size but v1 header version to avoid OOB
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 10:45:04 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251112184504.GA196370@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251112181817.2027616-2-rpthibeault@gmail.com>
On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 01:18:18PM -0500, Raphael Pinsonneault-Thibeault wrote:
> In xlog_do_recovery_pass(),
> commit 45cf976008dd ("xfs: fix log recovery buffer allocation for the
> legacy h_size fixup")
> added a fix to take the corrected h_size (from the xfsprogs bug
> workaround) into consideration for the log recovery buffer calculation.
> Without it, we would still allocate the buffer based on the incorrect
> on-disk size.
>
> However, in a scenario similar to 45cf976008dd, syzbot creates a fuzzed
> record where xfs_has_logv2() but the xlog_rec_header h_version !=
> XLOG_VERSION_2. Meaning, we skip the log recover buffer calculation
> fix and allocate the buffer based on the incorrect on-disk size. Hence,
> a KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds read in xlog_do_recovery_pass() ->
> xlog_recover_process() -> xlog_cksum().
>
> Fix by rejecting the record header for
> h_size > XLOG_HEADER_CYCLE_SIZE && !XLOG_VERSION_2
> since the larger h_size cannot work for v1 logs, and the log stripe unit
> adjustment is only a v2 feature.
>
> Reported-by: syzbot+9f6d080dece587cfdd4c@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=9f6d080dece587cfdd4c
> Tested-by: syzbot+9f6d080dece587cfdd4c@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> Fixes: 45cf976008dd ("xfs: fix log recovery buffer allocation for the legacy h_size fixup")
> Signed-off-by: Raphael Pinsonneault-Thibeault <rpthibeault@gmail.com>
> ---
> changelog
> v1 -> v2:
> - reject the mount for h_size > XLOG_HEADER_CYCLE_SIZE && !XLOG_VERSION_2
> - update commit subject and message
>
> fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c | 8 ++++++--
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> index e6ed9e09c027..99a903e01869 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> @@ -3064,8 +3064,12 @@ xlog_do_recovery_pass(
> * still allocate the buffer based on the incorrect on-disk
> * size.
> */
> - if (h_size > XLOG_HEADER_CYCLE_SIZE &&
> - (rhead->h_version & cpu_to_be32(XLOG_VERSION_2))) {
Just out of curiosity, why is this a bit flag test? Did XFS ever emit a
log record with both XLOG_VERSION_2 *and* XLOG_VERSION_1 set? The code
that writes new log records only sets h_version to 1 or 2, not 3.
(I can't tell if this is a hysterical raisins compatibility thing, or
just bugs)
--D
> + if (h_size > XLOG_HEADER_CYCLE_SIZE) {
> + if (!(rhead->h_version & cpu_to_be32(XLOG_VERSION_2))) {
> + error = -EFSCORRUPTED;
> + goto bread_err1;
> + }
> +
> hblks = DIV_ROUND_UP(h_size, XLOG_HEADER_CYCLE_SIZE);
> if (hblks > 1) {
> kvfree(hbp);
> --
> 2.43.0
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-12 18:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-12 14:10 [PATCH] xfs: ensure log recovery buffer is resized to avoid OOB Raphael Pinsonneault-Thibeault
2025-11-12 15:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-12 18:18 ` [PATCH] xfs: reject log records with v2 size but v1 header version " Raphael Pinsonneault-Thibeault
2025-11-12 18:45 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2025-11-13 6:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-12 22:19 ` [PATCH] xfs: ensure log recovery buffer is resized " Dave Chinner
2025-11-13 19:01 ` [PATCH v3] xfs: validate log record version against superblock log version Raphael Pinsonneault-Thibeault
2025-11-18 20:19 ` Dave Chinner
2025-11-19 15:37 ` [PATCH v4] " Raphael Pinsonneault-Thibeault
2025-11-19 20:16 ` Dave Chinner
2025-11-20 6:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-24 17:47 ` [PATCH v5] " Raphael Pinsonneault-Thibeault
2025-11-24 18:52 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-11-25 6:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-25 17:06 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-11-25 6:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20251112184504.GA196370@frogsfrogsfrogs \
--to=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=cem@kernel.org \
--cc=chandanbabu@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rpthibeault@gmail.com \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=syzbot+9f6d080dece587cfdd4c@syzkaller.appspotmail.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