On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 02:19:40PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 13-05-15 11:56:46, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > The journal revoke block recovery code does not check r_count for
> > sanity, which means that an evil value of r_count could result in
> > the kernel reading off the end of the revoke table and into whatever
> > garbage lies beyond. This could crash the kernel, so fix that.
> >
> > However, in testing this fix, I discovered that the code to write
> > out the revoke tables also was not correctly checking to see if the
> > block was full -- the current offset check is fine so long as the
> > revoke table space size is a multiple of the record size, but this
> > is not true when either journal_csum_v[23] are set.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ...
> > @@ -594,9 +594,14 @@ static void write_one_revoke_record(journal_t *journal,
> > if (jbd2_journal_has_csum_v2or3(journal))
> > csum_size = sizeof(struct jbd2_journal_revoke_tail);
> >
> > + if (JBD2_HAS_INCOMPAT_FEATURE(journal, JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_64BIT))
> > + sz = 8;
> > + else
> > + sz = 4;
> > +
> > /* Make sure we have a descriptor with space left for the record */
> > if (descriptor) {
> > - if (offset >= journal->j_blocksize - csum_size) {
> > + if (offset + sz >= journal->j_blocksize - csum_size) {
> Hum, but we can have strict inequality here, can't we? Otherwise the
> patch looks good to me.
You're right, it could be greater-than here. Will respin this and the
corresponding e2fsprogs patch.
--D
>
> Honza
>
>
> --
> Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
> SUSE Labs, CR
> --
> 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
--
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
