From: Tiger Yang Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext3/4: fix uninitialized bs in ext3/4_xattr_set_handle() Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 10:31:04 +0800 Message-ID: <4828FD68.40608@oracle.com> References: <4827B878.50903@oracle.com> <20080512170254.f79fe869.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andreas Gruenbacher , stable@kernel.org To: Andrew Morton Return-path: Received: from rgminet01.oracle.com ([148.87.113.118]:51898 "EHLO rgminet01.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753583AbYEMCjR (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 May 2008 22:39:17 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080512170254.f79fe869.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi, Andrew This situation only happens we format ext3/4 with inode size more than 128 and we have put xattr entries both in ibody and block. The consequences about this bug is we will lost the xattr block which pointed by i_file_acl with all xattr entires in it. We will alloc a new xattr block and put that large value entry in it. The old xattr block will become orphan block. Best regards, tiger Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 12 May 2008 11:24:40 +0800 > Tiger Yang wrote: > > >> I met a bug when I try to replace a xattr entry in ibody with a big size >> value. But in ibody there has no space for the new value. So it should >> set new xattr entry in block and remove the old xattr entry in ibody. >> >> Best regards, >> tiger >> >> >> [xattr.patch text/x-patch (1.3KB)] >> This fix the uninitialized bs when we try to replace a xattr entry in ibody with the new value which require more than free space. >> >> Signed-off-by: Tiger Yang >> >> diff --git a/fs/ext3/xattr.c b/fs/ext3/xattr.c >> index a6ea4d6..e1af9bd 100644 >> --- a/fs/ext3/xattr.c >> +++ b/fs/ext3/xattr.c >> @@ -1000,6 +1000,11 @@ ext3_xattr_set_handle(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode, int name_index, >> i.value = NULL; >> error = ext3_xattr_block_set(handle, inode, &i, &bs); >> } else if (error == -ENOSPC) { >> + if (EXT3_I(inode)->i_file_acl && !bs.s.base) { >> + error = ext3_xattr_block_find(inode, &i, &bs); >> + if (error) >> + goto cleanup; >> + } >> error = ext3_xattr_block_set(handle, inode, &i, &bs); >> if (error) >> goto cleanup; >> > > That sounds fairly bad. > > What are the consequences of this bug, when someone hits it? > > It appears that we should backport this fix into 2.6.25.x (and perhaps > earlier). What do you think? > >