Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 17 May 2022 10:28:08 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode | From | Chao Yu <> |
| |
On 2022/5/17 8:46, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 05/15, Chao Yu wrote: >> Yanming reported a kernel bug in Bugzilla kernel [1], which can be >> reproduced. The bug message is: >> >> 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 >> >> [1] https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 >> >> The bug is due to fuzzed inode has both inline_data and encrypted flags. >> During f2fs_evict_inode(), as the inode was deleted by rename(), it >> 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(). >> >> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >> Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> >> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> >> --- >> v3: >> - clean up commit message suggested by Bagas Sanjaya. >> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 8 ++++++++ >> fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- >> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >> index 492af5b96de1..0dc2461ef02c 100644 >> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >> @@ -4126,6 +4126,14 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) >> */ >> static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) >> { >> + /* >> + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not >> + * been synchronized to inmem fields. >> + */ >> + if (S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && (file_is_encrypt(inode) || >> + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL || >> + file_is_verity(inode))) >> + return true; > > Again, I prefer to check this in sanity_check_inode(), since we don't need to > check all the time here.
Sure, how about adding a new parameter for f2fs_may_inline_data() to indicate its caller is sanity_check_inode(), and do the checks here only for such path?
Thanks,
> >> return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || >> f2fs_compressed_file(inode); >> } >> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c >> index 2fce8fa0dac8..5e494c98e3c2 100644 >> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c >> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c >> @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) >> } >> } >> >> - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && >> - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { >> + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { >> set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); >> f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", >> __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); >> -- >> 2.32.0
| |