public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@sgi.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfsprogs: fix inode crash in xfs_repair
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 16:40:13 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130814064013.GC12779@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130813221739.031858865@sgi.com>

On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 05:13:31PM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> Adding the lost+found in phase 6 could allocate an inode from
> a new inode chunk. That newly created chunk was not around in
> the scan phase, and is not in the avl tree which will result
> in a NULL dereference.
> 
> This patch adds the newly created inode chunk and inodes as if
> found in the scan phase.
> 
> Metadata dump available for future tests.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@sgi.com>
> ---
>  repair/incore_ino.c |    2 +-
>  repair/phase6.c     |   15 +++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> Index: b/repair/incore_ino.c
> ===================================================================
> --- a/repair/incore_ino.c
> +++ b/repair/incore_ino.c
> @@ -700,7 +700,7 @@ get_inode_parent(ino_tree_node_t *irec,
>  	return(0LL);
>  }
>  
> -static void
> +void
>  alloc_ex_data(ino_tree_node_t *irec)
>  {
>  	parent_list_t 	*ptbl;
> Index: b/repair/phase6.c
> ===================================================================
> --- a/repair/phase6.c
> +++ b/repair/phase6.c
> @@ -930,6 +930,21 @@ mk_orphanage(xfs_mount_t *mp)
>  	irec = find_inode_rec(mp,
>  			XFS_INO_TO_AGNO(mp, ino),
>  			XFS_INO_TO_AGINO(mp, ino));
> +
> +	if (irec == NULL && XFS_INO_TO_AGNO(mp, ino) < mp->m_sb.sb_agcount &&
> +	    ip != NULL && ip->i_d.di_magic == XFS_DINODE_MAGIC) {

I don't understand this check.

We've already dereferenced ip several lines above to increment the
link count and get the inode number stored in ino, so the ip != NULL
is unnecessary.

We've just allocated the inode, so why would the magic number be
wrong? And why would the inode number lie in a non-existent
allocation group?

> +		/*
> +		 * add the newly allocated inode chunk to the avl tree.
> +		 */

I can see from the code we are allocating and irec, inserting it
into the AVL tree and marking all the inodes in the chunk as free.
The comment should explain *why* we need to do this.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2013-08-14  6:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-08-13 22:13 [PATCH] xfsprogs: fix inode crash in xfs_repair Mark Tinguely
2013-08-14  6:40 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2013-08-14 13:33   ` Mark Tinguely
2013-08-15  0:33     ` Dave Chinner
2013-08-15 14:07       ` Mark Tinguely
2013-08-15 21:47         ` Dave Chinner

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=20130814064013.GC12779@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=tinguely@sgi.com \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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