From: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Bill O'Donnell <billodo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] libxfs: add more bounds checking to sb sanity checks
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2018 16:38:35 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180730233835.GR30972@magnolia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <82b9a6d9-c5b9-112d-98eb-c9e7153e67da@sandeen.net>
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 06:16:40PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 7/30/18 12:30 AM, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > From: Bill O'Donnell <billodo@redhat.com>
> >
> > Current sb verifier doesn't check bounds on sb_fdblocks and sb_ifree.
> > Add sanity checks for these parameters.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Bill O'Donnell <billodo@redhat.com>
> > [darrick: port to refactored sb validation predicates]
> > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
>
> comment nitpicks below, but otherwise
>
> Reviewed-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
>
> > ---
> > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> > index 516bef7b0f50..64bc471d57e6 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> > @@ -153,6 +153,18 @@ xfs_validate_sb_write(
> > struct xfs_mount *mp,
> > struct xfs_sb *sbp)
> > {
> > + /*
> > + * Carry out additional sb sanity checks exclusively for writes.
>
> We're in xfs_validate_sb_write so that's obvious, can drop this line.
>
> > + * We don't do these checks for reads, since faulty parameters could
> > + * be fixed in the log, and we shouldn't prohibit mounting for those
> > + * cases.
> > + */
>
> Hm, it's not really a log reaplay issue, right? These summary counters
> get reinitialized at mount, so failing to mount before we overwrite them
> anyway makes no sense.
Well, we don't reinitialize them if ( (!lazysbcount) or (clean log) )
and (non-crazy values)...
> /*
> * These summary counters get re-initialized after they are read
> * during mount, so this is a write-only check.
They're not always re-initialized -- only if we had a dirty lazysbcont
fs or the values were crazy.
/*
* Carry out additional sb summary counter sanity checks when we write
* the superblock. We skip this in the read validator because there
* could be newer superblocks in the log and if the values are garbage
* even after replay we'll recalculate them at the end of log mount.
*/
--D
> */
>
> ? And yeah, modulo lazycount... but whatevs.
>
> -Eric
>
> > + if (sbp->sb_fdblocks > sbp->sb_dblocks ||
> > + sbp->sb_ifree > sbp->sb_icount) {
> > + xfs_warn(mp, "SB summary counter sanity check failed");
> > + return -EFSCORRUPTED;
> > + }
> > +
> > if (!xfs_sb_version_hascrc(sbp))
> > return 0;
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-31 1:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-30 5:30 [PATCH 0/3] xfs-4.19: superblock verifier cleanups Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-30 5:30 ` [PATCH 1/3] xfs: refactor superblock verifiers Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-30 23:06 ` Eric Sandeen
2018-07-30 23:29 ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-30 5:30 ` [PATCH 2/3] libxfs: add more bounds checking to sb sanity checks Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-30 23:16 ` Eric Sandeen
2018-07-30 23:38 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2018-07-30 23:40 ` Eric Sandeen
2018-07-30 5:30 ` [PATCH 3/3] xfs: verify icount in superblock write Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-30 23:26 ` Eric Sandeen
2018-07-30 23:41 ` Darrick J. Wong
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=20180730233835.GR30972@magnolia \
--to=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=billodo@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sandeen@sandeen.net \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).