lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subject[PATCH] ext4: fix a NULL pointer when validating an inode bitmap
Date
It's possible to hit a NULL pointer exception while accessing the
sb->s_group_info in ext4_validate_inode_bitmap(), when calling
ext4_get_group_info().

EXT4-fs (loop0): warning: mounting unchecked fs, running e2fsck is recommended
EXT4-fs error (device loop0): ext4_clear_blocks:866: inode #32: comm mount: attempt to clear invalid blocks 16777450 len 1
EXT4-fs error (device loop0): ext4_free_branches:1012: inode #32: comm mount: invalid indirect mapped block 1258291200 (level 1)
EXT4-fs error (device loop0): ext4_free_branches:1012: inode #32: comm mount: invalid indirect mapped block 7379847 (level 2)
BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000000
...
RIP: 0010:ext4_read_inode_bitmap+0x21b/0x5a0
...
Call Trace:
<TASK>
ext4_free_inode+0x172/0x5c0
ext4_evict_inode+0x4a5/0x730
evict+0xc1/0x1c0
ext4_setup_system_zone+0x2ea/0x380
ext4_fill_super+0x249f/0x3910
? ext4_reconfigure+0x880/0x880
? snprintf+0x49/0x60
? ext4_reconfigure+0x880/0x880
get_tree_bdev+0x169/0x260
vfs_get_tree+0x16/0x70
path_mount+0x77d/0xa30
__x64_sys_mount+0x101/0x140
do_syscall_64+0x3c/0x80
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x46/0xb0

Fix the issue by adding an extra NULL check. And, while there, also ensure the
right error code (-EFSCORRUPTED) is propagated to user-space. EUCLEAN is more
informative than ENOMEM.

CC: stable@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=216541
Signed-off-by: Luís Henriques <lhenriques@suse.de>
---
fs/ext4/ext4.h | 17 ++++++++++-------
fs/ext4/ialloc.c | 2 +-
fs/ext4/indirect.c | 14 ++++++++++++--
3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext4/ext4.h b/fs/ext4/ext4.h
index 3bf9a6926798..91317f592999 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/ext4.h
+++ b/fs/ext4/ext4.h
@@ -3323,13 +3323,16 @@ static inline
struct ext4_group_info *ext4_get_group_info(struct super_block *sb,
ext4_group_t group)
{
- struct ext4_group_info **grp_info;
- long indexv, indexh;
- BUG_ON(group >= EXT4_SB(sb)->s_groups_count);
- indexv = group >> (EXT4_DESC_PER_BLOCK_BITS(sb));
- indexh = group & ((EXT4_DESC_PER_BLOCK(sb)) - 1);
- grp_info = sbi_array_rcu_deref(EXT4_SB(sb), s_group_info, indexv);
- return grp_info[indexh];
+ struct ext4_group_info **grp_info;
+ long indexv, indexh;
+
+ BUG_ON(group >= EXT4_SB(sb)->s_groups_count);
+ if (!EXT4_SB(sb)->s_group_info)
+ return NULL;
+ indexv = group >> (EXT4_DESC_PER_BLOCK_BITS(sb));
+ indexh = group & ((EXT4_DESC_PER_BLOCK(sb)) - 1);
+ grp_info = sbi_array_rcu_deref(EXT4_SB(sb), s_group_info, indexv);
+ return grp_info[indexh];
}

/*
diff --git a/fs/ext4/ialloc.c b/fs/ext4/ialloc.c
index 208b87ce8858..0e8d35d05b69 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/ialloc.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/ialloc.c
@@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ static int ext4_validate_inode_bitmap(struct super_block *sb,

if (buffer_verified(bh))
return 0;
- if (EXT4_MB_GRP_IBITMAP_CORRUPT(grp))
+ if (!grp || EXT4_MB_GRP_IBITMAP_CORRUPT(grp))
return -EFSCORRUPTED;

ext4_lock_group(sb, block_group);
diff --git a/fs/ext4/indirect.c b/fs/ext4/indirect.c
index 860fc5119009..e5ac5c2363df 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/indirect.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/indirect.c
@@ -148,6 +148,7 @@ static Indirect *ext4_get_branch(struct inode *inode, int depth,
struct super_block *sb = inode->i_sb;
Indirect *p = chain;
struct buffer_head *bh;
+ unsigned int key;
int ret = -EIO;

*err = 0;
@@ -156,9 +157,18 @@ static Indirect *ext4_get_branch(struct inode *inode, int depth,
if (!p->key)
goto no_block;
while (--depth) {
- bh = sb_getblk(sb, le32_to_cpu(p->key));
+ key = le32_to_cpu(p->key);
+ bh = sb_getblk(sb, key);
if (unlikely(!bh)) {
- ret = -ENOMEM;
+ /*
+ * sb_getblk() masks different errors by always
+ * returning NULL. Let's distinguish at least the case
+ * where the block is out of range.
+ */
+ if (key > ext4_blocks_count(EXT4_SB(sb)->s_es))
+ ret = -EFSCORRUPTED;
+ else
+ ret = -ENOMEM;
goto failure;
}

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-10-10 16:21    [W:0.354 / U:0.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site