From: Zhan Xusheng <zhanxusheng1024@gmail.com>
To: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: Konstantin Komarov <almaz.alexandrovich@paragon-software.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Zhan Xusheng <zhanxusheng@xiaomi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/ntfs3: reject evcn == U64_MAX in mi_enum_attr()
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2026 10:03:09 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260425020309.1663-1-zhanxusheng@xiaomi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260424161558.2d21b624@pumpkin>
On Fri, 24 Apr 2026 16:15:58 +0100
David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is that analysis correct? with the current code:
> If evcn is 2 then everything except 0, 1, 2 and 3 are errors.
> If evcn is -3 then only -1 is an error.
> If evcn is -2 no values are errors.
> If evcn is -1 then all svcn values except 0 are errors.
>
> Clearly this doesn't make sense if evcn is -1.
>
> But there isn't an obvious reason why svcn == -4, evcn == -1
> shouldn't be a valid range.
> (There might be a sanity upper limit is evcn for other reasons.)
Thanks for looking into this, David.
The on-disk svcn/evcn fields are __le64 (ntfs.h:339-340), and ntfs3
uses them as u64 throughout -- the internal VCN type CLST is typedef'd
to u32 or u64 (ntfs.h:73-78). NTFS VCNs are unsigned by definition;
there is no such thing as a negative VCN.
So the signed interpretation doesn't apply here. In the unsigned
domain, 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF is simply the maximum u64 value, not -1.
The only issue is the arithmetic wrap: (u64)0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF + 1 == 0.
Regarding a separate upper bound: yes, evcn is also bounded by the
volume's total cluster count, but mi_enum_attr() validates on-disk
MFT records before the superblock fields are necessarily available
to every caller, so the U64_MAX check is the minimal fix for the
overflow.
Thanks,
Zhan Xusheng
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-25 2:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-24 2:46 [PATCH] fs/ntfs3: reject evcn == U64_MAX in mi_enum_attr() Zhan Xusheng
2026-04-24 9:20 ` David Laight
2026-04-24 13:20 ` Zhan Xusheng
2026-04-24 15:15 ` David Laight
2026-04-25 2:03 ` Zhan Xusheng [this message]
2026-04-25 10:42 ` David Laight
2026-04-27 3:47 ` [PATCH v2] fs/ntfs3: reject invalid evcn == (u64)-1 " Zhan Xusheng
2026-04-27 3:50 ` [PATCH v3] " Zhan Xusheng
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=20260425020309.1663-1-zhanxusheng@xiaomi.com \
--to=zhanxusheng1024@gmail.com \
--cc=almaz.alexandrovich@paragon-software.com \
--cc=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zhanxusheng@xiaomi.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