Hi all, Dave, Eric, and I have been chasing a stale data exposure bug in the XFS reflink implementation, and tracked it down to reflink forgetting to do some of the file-extending activities that must happen for regular writes. We then started auditing the clone, dedupe, and copyfile code and realized that from a file contents perspective, clonerange isn't any different from a regular file write. Unfortunately, we also noticed that *unlike* a regular write, clonerange skips a ton of overflow checks, such as validating the ranges against s_maxbytes, MAX_NON_LFS, and RLIMIT_FSIZE. We also observed that cloning into a file did not strip security privileges (suid, capabilities) like a regular write would. I also noticed that xfs and ocfs2 need to dump the page cache before remapping blocks, not after. In fixing the range checking problems I also realized that both dedupe and copyfile tell userspace how much of the requested operation was acted upon. Since the range validation can shorten a clone request (or we can ENOSPC midway through), we might as well plumb the short operation reporting back through the VFS indirection code to userspace. So, here's the whole giant pile of patches[1] that fix all the problems. The patch "generic: test reflink side effects" recently sent to fstests exercises the fixes in this series. Tests are in [2]. --D [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/djwong/xfs-linux.git/log/?h=djwong-devel [2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/djwong/xfstests-dev.git/log/?h=djwong-devel
