From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:60110 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752787AbeDWHN4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Apr 2018 03:13:56 -0400 Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 09:13:50 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" , Ben Hutchings , stable@vger.kernel.org, Wen Xu , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.9 37/95] ext4: add validity checks for bitmap block numbers Message-ID: <20180423071350.GB28186@kroah.com> References: <20180422135210.432103639@linuxfoundation.org> <20180422135211.941652389@linuxfoundation.org> <30c688b5783a5779811ce68893b7001390b9e200.camel@decadent.org.uk> <20180423060352.GA8194@thunk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180423060352.GA8194@thunk.org> Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 02:03:52AM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 10:54:23PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > offset = blk - group_first_block; > > > - if (!ext4_test_bit(EXT4_B2C(sbi, offset), bh->b_data)) > > > + if (offset < 0 || EXT4_B2C(sbi, offset) >= sb->s_blocksize || > > > + !ext4_test_bit(EXT4_B2C(sbi, offset), bh->b_data)) > > > > Isn't sb->s_blocksize a count of bytes? If so, doesn't that mean that > > we should be comparing with sb->s_blocksize * 8? > > Yes, nice catch, Ben! Can we temporarily drop this patch from the > stable queue until I can get a fix in? > > In practice this shouldn't be a problem because of the default ext4 > layout with flex_bg. But we should definitely get this fixed before > we let this flow into the stable kernel. Now dropped from all queues. When you submit the fix, can you also tag it for stable so I know to pick this one back up? thanks, greg k-h