On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 10:03:38PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Theodore Tso wrote:
> > Hmm... disassembling the code, it's pretty clear the problem is here
> > in do_split(), around line 1208:
> >
> > map = (struct dx_map_entry *) (data2 + blocksize);
> > count = dx_make_map ((struct ext3_dir_entry_2 *) data1,
> > blocksize, hinfo, map);
> > map -= count;
> > dx_sort_map (map, count);
> > /* Split the existing block in the middle, size-wise */
> > size = 0;
> > move = 0;
> > for (i = count-1; i >= 0; i--) {
> > /* is more than half of this entry in 2nd half of the block? */
> > if (size + map[i].size/2 > blocksize/2) <====
>
> You sure this isn't our old friend
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=451068 ?
>
> which version of gcc compiled this?
As we discussed on IRC, I think you're theory is dead on. %ecx is at
the very end of the page-2, which would correspond to
map[count-1].size. And size (%esi) is zero, which rules out my scenario.
This very much looks like a GCC bug. Asheesh, can you confirm which
version of GCC you used to build your kernel?
Longer term, do_split() was coded in a very non-robust fashion.
Looking at do_split(), it was pretty easy to imagine corrupted
directory blocks that might force count to be 0 (causing the for loop
to do something insane, since i is unsigned), and adding some checks
to make sure that the split variable is neither 0 nor equal to count
might also be a really good idea.
- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
