Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 15 May 2022 16:57:19 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode | From | Chao Yu <> |
| |
On 2022/5/14 20:14, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > On Sat, May 14, 2022 at 04:01:02PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: >> As Yanming reported in bugzilla: >> >> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 >> >> I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. >> >> The kernel message is shown below: >> >> kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! >> Call Trace: >> evict+0x282/0x4e0 >> __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 >> dput+0x2dd/0x720 >> do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 >> __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 >> do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 >> >> The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted >> flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), >> it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then >> page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). >> >> This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline >> data inode in sanity_check_inode(). >> >> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >> Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> >> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > > Hi Chao, > > I think the patch message can be reworked , like below:
Hi Bagas,
Thanks a lot for your cleanup. :)
> > Yanming reported a kernel bug in Bugzilla kernel, which can be reproduced. > The bug message is:
I will keep the link for backtrace.
> > kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! > Call Trace: > evict+0x282/0x4e0 > __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 > dput+0x2dd/0x720 > do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 > __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 > do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 > > The bug is due to fuzzed inode has both inline_data and encrypted flags. > During f2fs_evict_inode(), after the inode was deleted by rename(), it
I prefer "during f2fs_evict_inode(), as inode was deleted by rename()"
> will cause inline data conversion due to conflicting flags. The page > cache will be polluted and the panic will be triggered in clear_inode(). > > Try fixing the bug by doing more sanity checks for inline data inode in > sanity_check_inode().
Let me revise in v3.
Thanks,
> > Thanks. >
| |