[PATCH] xfs_check: fix test for too-high level in v2 dir node
Eric Sandeen
sandeen at sandeen.net
Wed Sep 18 15:20:00 CDT 2013
On 9/18/13 2:35 PM, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> On 09/12/13 16:00, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> The test as it stands allows level == XFS_DA_NODE_MAXDEPTH (5),
>> but a max depth of 5 equates to level values of 0 through 4.
>>
>> Level 5 would be a depth of 6.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen<sandeen at redhat.com>
>> ---
>>
>
>> diff --git a/db/check.c b/db/check.c
>> index cbe55ba..d9e3e3f 100644
>> --- a/db/check.c
>> +++ b/db/check.c
>> @@ -3138,7 +3138,7 @@ process_leaf_node_dir_v2_int(
>> case XFS_DA_NODE_MAGIC:
>> node = iocur_top->data;
>> xfs_da3_node_hdr_from_disk(&nodehdr, node);
>> - if (nodehdr.level< 1 || nodehdr.level> XFS_DA_NODE_MAXDEPTH) {
>> + if (nodehdr.level< 1 || nodehdr.level>= XFS_DA_NODE_MAXDEPTH) {
>> if (!sflag || v)
>> dbprintf(_("bad node block level %d for dir ino "
>> "%lld block %d\n"),
>
>
> I think the current code is correct.
>
> 0 is a leaf. levels 1-XFS_DA_NODE_MAXDEPTH are nodes.
> Subtract 1 when used as an index.
case XFS_DA_NODE_MAGIC:
node = iocur_top->data;
xfs_da3_node_hdr_from_disk(&nodehdr, node);
to->level = be16_to_cpu(from->hdr.__level);
if (nodehdr.level < 1 || nodehdr.level > XFS_DA_NODE_MAXDEPTH) {
so nodehdr.level comes directly off the disk.
Hm, ok, let's look at the verifier, xfs_da3_node_verify:
xfs_da3_node_hdr_from_disk /* sets to->level = be16_to_cpu(from->hdr.__level) */
...
if (ichdr.level == 0)
return false;
if (ichdr.level > XFS_DA_NODE_MAXDEPTH)
return false;
ok, so 1 through XFS_DA_NODE_MAXDEPTH is valid for a generic node. *shrug* ok
fine, I agree. It's only xfs_check anyway. ;)
Feel free to drop this patch then.
But now I'm trying to reconcile it w/ the code in repair,
i = da_cursor->active = nodehdr.level;
if (i < 1 || i >= XFS_DA_NODE_MAXDEPTH) {
which considers nodehdr.level == XFS_DA_NODE_MAXDEPTH to be problematic, because
i (== nodehdr.level) is used directly as an index into a level[XFS_DA_NODE_MAXDEPTH]-sized
array.
So confused. :/ (Maybe the cursor array needs to be 1 bigger?)
-Eric
More information about the xfs
mailing list