This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
xfs: be more forgiving of a v4 secondary sb w/ junk in v5 fields
to the 3.12-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
The filename of the patch is:
xfs-be-more-forgiving-of-a-v4-secondary-sb-w-junk-in-v5-fields.patch
and it can be found in the queue-3.12 subdirectory.
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> know about it.
>From 10e6e65dfcedff63275c3d649d329c044caa8e26 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 15:33:29 -0500
Subject: xfs: be more forgiving of a v4 secondary sb w/ junk in v5 fields
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
commit 10e6e65dfcedff63275c3d649d329c044caa8e26 upstream.
Today, if xfs_sb_read_verify encounters a v4 superblock
with junk past v4 fields which includes data in sb_crc,
it will be treated as a failing checksum and a significant
corruption.
There are known prior bugs which leave junk at the end
of the V4 superblock; we don't need to actually fail the
verification in this case if other checks pan out ok.
So if this is a secondary superblock, and the primary
superblock doesn't indicate that this is a V5 filesystem,
don't treat this as an actual checksum failure.
We should probably check the garbage condition as
we do in xfs_repair, and possibly warn about it
or self-heal, but that's a different scope of work.
Stable folks: This can go back to v3.10, which is what
introduced the sb CRC checking that is tripped up by old,
stale, incorrect V4 superblocks w/ unzeroed bits.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/xfs/xfs_sb.c | 13 +++++++++++--
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_sb.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_sb.c
@@ -596,6 +596,11 @@ xfs_sb_verify(
* single bit error could clear the feature bit and unused parts of the
* superblock are supposed to be zero. Hence a non-null crc field indicates that
* we've potentially lost a feature bit and we should check it anyway.
+ *
+ * However, past bugs (i.e. in growfs) left non-zeroed regions beyond the
+ * last field in V4 secondary superblocks. So for secondary superblocks,
+ * we are more forgiving, and ignore CRC failures if the primary doesn't
+ * indicate that the fs version is V5.
*/
static void
xfs_sb_read_verify(
@@ -616,8 +621,12 @@ xfs_sb_read_verify(
if (!xfs_verify_cksum(bp->b_addr, be16_to_cpu(dsb->sb_sectsize),
offsetof(struct xfs_sb, sb_crc))) {
- error = EFSCORRUPTED;
- goto out_error;
+ /* Only fail bad secondaries on a known V5 filesystem */
+ if (bp->b_bn != XFS_SB_DADDR &&
+ xfs_sb_version_hascrc(&mp->m_sb)) {
+ error = EFSCORRUPTED;
+ goto out_error;
+ }
}
}
error = xfs_sb_verify(bp, true);
Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx are
queue-3.12/xfs-be-more-forgiving-of-a-v4-secondary-sb-w-junk-in-v5-fields.patch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html