From: Baokun Li <libaokun1@huawei.com>
To: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <tytso@mit.edu>, <adilger.kernel@dilger.ca>, <jack@suse.cz>,
<ritesh.list@gmail.com>, <ojaswin@linux.ibm.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <yi.zhang@huawei.com>,
<yangerkun@huawei.com>, <yukuai3@huawei.com>,
<libaokun1@huawei.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/4] ext4: fix BUG in ext4_mb_new_inode_pa() due to overflow
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2023 21:10:50 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230718131052.283350-3-libaokun1@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230718131052.283350-1-libaokun1@huawei.com>
When we calculate the end position of ext4_free_extent, this position may
be exactly where ext4_lblk_t (i.e. uint) overflows. For example, if
ac_g_ex.fe_logical is 4294965248 and ac_orig_goal_len is 2048, then the
computed end is 0x100000000, which is 0. If ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical is not
the first case of adjusting the best extent, that is, new_bex_end > 0, the
following BUG_ON will be triggered:
=========================================================
kernel BUG at fs/ext4/mballoc.c:5116!
invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI
CPU: 3 PID: 673 Comm: xfs_io Tainted: G E 6.5.0-rc1+ #279
RIP: 0010:ext4_mb_new_inode_pa+0xc5/0x430
Call Trace:
<TASK>
ext4_mb_use_best_found+0x203/0x2f0
ext4_mb_try_best_found+0x163/0x240
ext4_mb_regular_allocator+0x158/0x1550
ext4_mb_new_blocks+0x86a/0xe10
ext4_ext_map_blocks+0xb0c/0x13a0
ext4_map_blocks+0x2cd/0x8f0
ext4_iomap_begin+0x27b/0x400
iomap_iter+0x222/0x3d0
__iomap_dio_rw+0x243/0xcb0
iomap_dio_rw+0x16/0x80
=========================================================
A simple reproducer demonstrating the problem:
mkfs.ext4 -F /dev/sda -b 4096 100M
mount /dev/sda /tmp/test
fallocate -l1M /tmp/test/tmp
fallocate -l10M /tmp/test/file
fallocate -i -o 1M -l16777203M /tmp/test/file
fsstress -d /tmp/test -l 0 -n 100000 -p 8 &
sleep 10 && killall -9 fsstress
rm -f /tmp/test/tmp
xfs_io -c "open -ad /tmp/test/file" -c "pwrite -S 0xff 0 8192"
We declare new_bex_start and new_bex_end as correct types and use fex_end()
to avoid the problems caused by the ext4_lblk_t overflow above.
Fixes: 93cdf49f6eca ("ext4: Fix best extent lstart adjustment logic in ext4_mb_new_inode_pa()")
Signed-off-by: Baokun Li <libaokun1@huawei.com>
---
fs/ext4/mballoc.c | 11 +++++------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
index eb7f5d35ef96..2090e5e7ba58 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
@@ -5076,8 +5076,8 @@ ext4_mb_new_inode_pa(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac)
pa = ac->ac_pa;
if (ac->ac_b_ex.fe_len < ac->ac_orig_goal_len) {
- int new_bex_start;
- int new_bex_end;
+ ext4_lblk_t new_bex_start;
+ loff_t new_bex_end;
/* we can't allocate as much as normalizer wants.
* so, found space must get proper lstart
@@ -5096,8 +5096,7 @@ ext4_mb_new_inode_pa(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac)
* still cover original start
* 3. Else, keep the best ex at start of original request.
*/
- new_bex_end = ac->ac_g_ex.fe_logical +
- EXT4_C2B(sbi, ac->ac_orig_goal_len);
+ new_bex_end = fex_end(sbi, &ac->ac_g_ex, &ac->ac_orig_goal_len);
new_bex_start = new_bex_end - EXT4_C2B(sbi, ac->ac_b_ex.fe_len);
if (ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical >= new_bex_start)
goto adjust_bex;
@@ -5117,8 +5116,8 @@ ext4_mb_new_inode_pa(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac)
BUG_ON(ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical < ac->ac_b_ex.fe_logical);
BUG_ON(ac->ac_o_ex.fe_len > ac->ac_b_ex.fe_len);
- BUG_ON(new_bex_end > (ac->ac_g_ex.fe_logical +
- EXT4_C2B(sbi, ac->ac_orig_goal_len)));
+ BUG_ON(new_bex_end >
+ fex_end(sbi, &ac->ac_g_ex, &ac->ac_orig_goal_len));
}
pa->pa_lstart = ac->ac_b_ex.fe_logical;
--
2.31.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-18 13:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-18 13:10 [PATCH 0/4] ext4: fix some ext4_lblk_t overflow issues Baokun Li
2023-07-18 13:10 ` [PATCH 1/4] ext4: add two helper functions fex_end() and pa_end() Baokun Li
2023-07-20 17:48 ` Ritesh Harjani
2023-07-18 13:10 ` Baokun Li [this message]
2023-07-20 12:44 ` [PATCH 2/4] ext4: fix BUG in ext4_mb_new_inode_pa() due to overflow Ritesh Harjani
2023-07-20 13:42 ` Baokun Li
2023-07-20 19:30 ` Ritesh Harjani
2023-07-21 7:29 ` Baokun Li
2023-07-21 8:24 ` Ritesh Harjani
2023-07-21 9:13 ` Baokun Li
2023-07-21 17:15 ` Theodore Ts'o
2023-07-22 3:16 ` Baokun Li
2023-07-20 19:07 ` Ritesh Harjani
2023-07-21 8:01 ` Baokun Li
2023-07-18 13:10 ` [PATCH 3/4] ext4: avoid overlapping preallocations " Baokun Li
2023-07-20 19:24 ` Ritesh Harjani
2023-07-18 13:10 ` [PATCH 4/4] ext4: avoid prealloc space being skipped " Baokun Li
2023-07-20 19:22 ` Ritesh Harjani
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20230718131052.283350-3-libaokun1@huawei.com \
--to=libaokun1@huawei.com \
--cc=adilger.kernel@dilger.ca \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ojaswin@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=yangerkun@huawei.com \
--cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
--cc=yukuai3@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®