Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 25 Jul 2022 12:06:56 -0700 | From | Soumya Negi <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] ntfs: Ensure $Extend is a directory |
| |
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 24, 2022 at 03:17:45PM -0700, Soumya Negi wrote: > On Sun, Jul 24, 2022 at 05:54:43PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 24, 2022 at 08:34:48AM -0700, Soumya Negi wrote: > > > On Sun, Jul 24, 2022 at 03:47:01PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jul 24, 2022 at 06:21:07AM -0700, Soumya Negi wrote: > > > > > Fixes Syzbot bug: kernel BUG in ntfs_lookup_inode_by_name > > > > > https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=32cf53b48c1846ffc25a185a2e92e170d1a95d71 > > > > > > > > > > Check whether $Extend is a directory or not( for NTFS3.0+) while loading > > > > > system files. If it isn't(as in the case of this bug where the mft record for > > > > > $Extend contains a regular file), load_system_files() returns false. > > > > > > > > Please wrap your changelog text at 72 columns like your editor asked you > > > > to when writing this :) > > > > > > I will correct the changelog(Don't think I can wrap the bug report > > > link. Checkpatch will still give a warning. Is that okay?). > > > > Yes, do not wrap links. > > > > > > > Reported-by: syzbot+30b7f850c6d98ea461d2@syzkaller.appspotmail.com > > > > > Signed-off-by: Soumya Negi <soumya.negi97@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > What commit caused this problem? What Fixes: tag should go here? > > > > > > I don't think this was caused by any specific commit.The $Extend > > > directory check is not present in any previous releases. Syzbot has > > > also not been able to produce a cause bisection for the bug. So no fixes > > > tag(please correct me if I am wrong). > > > > > > > Should it go to stable kernels? If so, how far back? > > > > > > Since the NTFS extension file was new to NTFS 3.0, perhaps the patch > > > should apply all the way back to the first release with NTFS3.0 support? > > > Yes, mark it there. > > Thanks. I will send v2 of the patch. Just want to make sure that the > patch will apply to 2.6.11.y before marking it.
2.6.11 is where I think NTFS3.0 support was first present and till where the patch should go. But I am not able to build 2.6.11 on my system and test the patch. I tried the patch on 4.14 and it works. Should I mark it to be backported till 4.14 instead?
With thanks, Soumya
| |