[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH V3] xfs_repair: test for bad level in dir2 node

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] xfs_repair: test for bad level in dir2 node
From: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 16:17:42 -0500
Cc: "'linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx'" <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <52322A84.1030007@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <52274F96.2010702@xxxxxxxxxxx> <52322A84.1030007@xxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20120122 Thunderbird/9.0
On 09/12/13 15:56, Eric Sandeen wrote:
In traverse_int_dir2block(), the variable 'i' is the level in
the tree, with 0 being a leaf node.  In the "do" loop we
start at the root, and work our way down to a leaf.

If the first node we read is an interior node with NODE_MAGIC,
but it tells us that its level is 0 (a leaf), this is clearly
an inconsistency.

Worse, we'd return with success, bno set, and only level[0]
in the cursor initialized.  Then down this path we'll
segfault when accessing an uninitialized (and zeroed) member
of the cursor's level array:

   traverse_int_dir2block  // returns 0 w/ bno set, only level[0] init'd
     verify_dir2_path(mp, da_cursor, 0) // p_level == 0
        this_level = p_level + 1;
        node = cursor->level[this_level].bp->b_addr; // level[1] uninit&  0'd

Fix this by recognizing that an interior node w/ level 0 is invalid, and
error out as for other inconsistencies.

By the time the level 0 test is done, we have already ensured that
this block has XFS_DA[3]_NODE_MAGIC.

Reported-by: Jan Yves Brueckner<jyb@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen<sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>

V3: Simplify the test.

Mark, Dave, I know you had some concerns about other conditions being
tested, but I think those are separate from this fix, which simply ensures
that the level we find for this _NODE block is within the valid range
for a node.  (It also matches the test currently present in xfs_check).



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>