From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Yousef Alhouseen <alhouseenyousef@gmail.com>
Cc: Carlos Maiolino <cem@kernel.org>,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org,
syzbot+b7dfbed0c6c2b5e9fd34@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: initialize first bad log block in head verification
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2026 13:13:50 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260629201350.GC6078@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260628092513.39620-1-alhouseenyousef@gmail.com>
On Sun, Jun 28, 2026 at 11:25:13AM +0200, Yousef Alhouseen wrote:
> xlog_do_recovery_pass() only writes first_bad when it reaches the common
> error exit after processing a log record. An earlier CRC or corruption
> failure can therefore return without initializing the out-parameter.
>
> xlog_verify_head() tests first_bad on those errors and may then use its
> uninitialized stack value as a log block number while searching for the
> last good record. Initialize it to zero, matching xlog_verify_tail(), so
> an error without a recorded bad block is returned directly.
>
> Fixes: 7088c4136fa1 ("xfs: detect and trim torn writes during log recovery")
> Reported-by: syzbot+b7dfbed0c6c2b5e9fd34@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=b7dfbed0c6c2b5e9fd34
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Yousef Alhouseen <alhouseenyousef@gmail.com>
> ---
> fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> index 09e6678ca487..d8125f3add4b 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> @@ -1028,7 +1028,7 @@ xlog_verify_head(
> {
> struct xlog_rec_header *tmp_rhead;
> char *tmp_buffer;
> - xfs_daddr_t first_bad;
> + xfs_daddr_t first_bad = 0;
Why is it safe to set this to the first daddr of the log? Is it
possible that a filesystem could have a log record starting near the end
of the log which wrapped around, and later suffered a CRC corruption in
daddr 0?
xfs_daddr_t already defines an explicit null value (XFS_BUF_DADDR_NULL);
wouldn't it be /much/ safer to set that here and update the if test body
later?
--D
> xfs_daddr_t tmp_rhead_blk;
> int found;
> int error;
> --
> 2.54.0
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-29 20:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-28 9:25 [PATCH] xfs: initialize first bad log block in head verification Yousef Alhouseen
2026-06-29 20:13 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2026-06-30 10:01 ` Yousef Alhouseen
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=20260629201350.GC6078@frogsfrogsfrogs \
--to=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=alhouseenyousef@gmail.com \
--cc=cem@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=syzbot+b7dfbed0c6c2b5e9fd34@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