From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ipmail01.adl2.internode.on.net ([150.101.137.133]:20882 "EHLO ipmail01.adl2.internode.on.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751232AbeFDAOJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jun 2018 20:14:09 -0400 Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 10:14:06 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/10] xfs: xfs_alloc_get_rec should return EFSCORRUPTED for obvious bnobt corruption Message-ID: <20180604001406.GE10363@dastard> References: <152806814253.18187.4009340462930782844.stgit@magnolia> <152806818878.18187.4844773238575124410.stgit@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <152806818878.18187.4844773238575124410.stgit@magnolia> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 04:23:08PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > From: Darrick J. Wong > > Return -EFSCORRUPTED when the bnobt/cntbt return obviously corrupt > values, rather than letting them bounce around in the internal code. > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong > --- > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c | 12 ++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c > index dc9dd3805d97..0214a77808d0 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c > @@ -231,10 +231,14 @@ xfs_alloc_get_rec( > int error; > > error = xfs_btree_get_rec(cur, &rec, stat); > - if (!error && *stat == 1) { > - *bno = be32_to_cpu(rec->alloc.ar_startblock); > - *len = be32_to_cpu(rec->alloc.ar_blockcount); > - } > + if (error || !(*stat)) > + return error; > + if (rec->alloc.ar_blockcount == 0) > + return -EFSCORRUPTED; > + > + *bno = be32_to_cpu(rec->alloc.ar_startblock); > + *len = be32_to_cpu(rec->alloc.ar_blockcount); Looks good, but makes me wonder if we should verify that ar_startblock is a valid agbno, and that the extent lies wholly within the AG? That can be another patch, though. Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com