Re: [PATCH] xfs_repair: fix bad next_unlinked field

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2/11/20 4:11 AM, John Jore wrote:
> Hi and thanks for this one.
> 
> Ran it twice. No errors were found on the second run.
> 
> Let me know if you need a dump or anything for validation purposes?

Nah it's all good, thanks for the report.

-Eric

> 
> John
> 
> ---
> From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: 11 February 2020 02:42
> To: linux-xfs
> Cc: John Jore
> Subject: [PATCH] xfs_repair: fix bad next_unlinked field
>     
> As of xfsprogs-4.17 we started testing whether the di_next_unlinked field
> on an inode is valid in the inode verifiers. However, this field is never
> tested or repaired during inode processing.
> 
> So if, for example, we had a completely zeroed-out inode, we'd detect and
> fix the broken magic and version, but the invalid di_next_unlinked field
> would not be touched, fail the write verifier, and prevent the inode from
> being properly repaired or even written out.
> 
> Fix this by checking the di_next_unlinked inode field for validity and
> clearing it if it is invalid.
> 
> Reported-by: John Jore <john@xxxxxxx>
> Fixes: 2949b4677 ("xfs: don't accept inode buffers with suspicious unlinked chains")
> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> 
> diff --git a/repair/dinode.c b/repair/dinode.c
> index 8af2cb25..c5d2f350 100644
> --- a/repair/dinode.c
> +++ b/repair/dinode.c
> @@ -2272,6 +2272,7 @@ process_dinode_int(xfs_mount_t *mp,
>          const int               is_free = 0;
>          const int               is_used = 1;
>          blkmap_t                *dblkmap = NULL;
> +       xfs_agino_t             unlinked_ino;
>  
>          *dirty = *isa_dir = 0;
>          *used = is_used;
> @@ -2351,6 +2352,23 @@ process_dinode_int(xfs_mount_t *mp,
>                  }
>          }
>  
> +       unlinked_ino = be32_to_cpu(dino->di_next_unlinked);
> +       if (!xfs_verify_agino_or_null(mp, agno, unlinked_ino)) {
> +               retval = 1;
> +               if (!uncertain)
> +                       do_warn(_("bad next_unlinked 0x%x on inode %" PRIu64 "%c"),
> +                               (__s32)dino->di_next_unlinked, lino,
> +                               verify_mode ? '\n' : ',');
> +               if (!verify_mode) {
> +                       if (!no_modify) {
> +                               do_warn(_(" resetting next_unlinked\n"));
> +                               clear_dinode_unlinked(mp, dino);
> +                               *dirty = 1;
> +                       } else
> +                               do_warn(_(" would reset next_unlinked\n"));
> +               }
> +       }
> +
>          /*
>           * We don't bother checking the CRC here - we cannot guarantee that when
>           * we are called here that the inode has not already been modified in
> 
>      
> 





[Index of Archives]     [XFS Filesystem Development (older mail)]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux