* [PATCH] erofs: fix unbalanced buf->off handling in erofs_bread()
@ 2026-09-12 2:57 Binglei Wang
2026-09-12 9:25 ` Gao Xiang
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Binglei Wang @ 2026-09-12 2:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-erofs; +Cc: xiang, chao, shengyong1, linux-kernel, Binglei Wang, stable
From: Binglei Wang <l3b2w1@gmail.com>
erofs_bread() locates the target folio with
index = (buf->off + offset) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
but computes the in-folio offset without taking buf->off into account:
return buf->base + (offset & ~PAGE_MASK);
If buf->off is not page-aligned, the returned pointer misses the in-page
component of buf->off, so callers end up fetching data from a wrong
offset.
buf->off is set to sbi->dif0.fsoff in erofs_init_metabuf(), and fsoff can
be specified via the "fsoffset=" mount option, which only requires
block-size alignment. Therefore, on an image with a sub-page block size
(e.g. 512 bytes), a non-page-aligned fsoff (e.g. 512) triggers the issue,
since 512 is a multiple of the block size but not of PAGE_SIZE.
It can be reproduced by mounting an image that is placed at a
non-page-aligned offset:
mkfs.erofs -b512 -zlz4hc sub.erofs src/
# prepend 512 bytes of padding to the image
mount -t erofs -o loop,fsoffset=512 padded.erofs /mnt
which fails with
erofs (device loop0): cannot find valid erofs superblock
because the on-disk superblock (at offset 1024 within the image, i.e.
1536 within the padded file) is read from a wrong in-folio offset. With
this fixed, the very same image mounts successfully and its file contents
match those read from the unpadded image.
Fix it by including buf->off in the in-folio offset calculation, so that
it is consistent with the folio index calculation.
Fixes: c36ec00d7f67 ("erofs: add 'fsoffset' mount option to specify filesystem offset")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 6.16+
Signed-off-by: Binglei Wang <l3b2w1@gmail.com>
---
fs/erofs/data.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/erofs/data.c b/fs/erofs/data.c
index 0885b1f2fc92..be63b89f0862 100644
--- a/fs/erofs/data.c
+++ b/fs/erofs/data.c
@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ void *erofs_bread(struct erofs_buf *buf, erofs_off_t offset, bool need_kmap)
return NULL;
if (!buf->base)
buf->base = kmap_local_page(buf->page);
- return buf->base + (offset & ~PAGE_MASK);
+ return buf->base + ((buf->off + offset) & ~PAGE_MASK);
}
int erofs_init_metabuf(struct erofs_buf *buf, struct super_block *sb,
--
2.33.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] erofs: fix unbalanced buf->off handling in erofs_bread()
2026-09-12 2:57 [PATCH] erofs: fix unbalanced buf->off handling in erofs_bread() Binglei Wang
@ 2026-09-12 9:25 ` Gao Xiang
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Gao Xiang @ 2026-09-12 9:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Binglei Wang; +Cc: linux-erofs, xiang, chao, shengyong1, linux-kernel
On Sat, Sep 12, 2026 at 10:57:09AM +0800, Binglei Wang wrote:
> From: Binglei Wang <l3b2w1@gmail.com>
>
> erofs_bread() locates the target folio with
>
> index = (buf->off + offset) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
>
> but computes the in-folio offset without taking buf->off into account:
>
> return buf->base + (offset & ~PAGE_MASK);
>
> If buf->off is not page-aligned, the returned pointer misses the in-page
> component of buf->off, so callers end up fetching data from a wrong
> offset.
>
> buf->off is set to sbi->dif0.fsoff in erofs_init_metabuf(), and fsoff can
> be specified via the "fsoffset=" mount option, which only requires
> block-size alignment. Therefore, on an image with a sub-page block size
> (e.g. 512 bytes), a non-page-aligned fsoff (e.g. 512) triggers the issue,
> since 512 is a multiple of the block size but not of PAGE_SIZE.
>
> It can be reproduced by mounting an image that is placed at a
> non-page-aligned offset:
>
> mkfs.erofs -b512 -zlz4hc sub.erofs src/
> # prepend 512 bytes of padding to the image
> mount -t erofs -o loop,fsoffset=512 padded.erofs /mnt
>
> which fails with
>
> erofs (device loop0): cannot find valid erofs superblock
>
> because the on-disk superblock (at offset 1024 within the image, i.e.
> 1536 within the padded file) is read from a wrong in-folio offset. With
> this fixed, the very same image mounts successfully and its file contents
> match those read from the unpadded image.
>
> Fix it by including buf->off in the in-folio offset calculation, so that
> it is consistent with the folio index calculation.
>
> Fixes: c36ec00d7f67 ("erofs: add 'fsoffset' mount option to specify filesystem offset")
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 6.16+
> Signed-off-by: Binglei Wang <l3b2w1@gmail.com>
As I said, I aiready applied a version before, please don't
send it again.
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] erofs: fix unbalanced buf->off handling in erofs_bread()
[not found] <CAJ3C4Kwms2my+y_T0Mx+XM_gb9gs7cVZ7w4v2GRAURF1rRFU0g@mail.gmail.com>
@ 2026-09-11 4:22 ` Gao Xiang
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Gao Xiang @ 2026-09-11 4:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: binglei wang
Cc: linux-erofs, xiang, chao, shengyong1, zbestahu, jefflexu,
dhavale, hongbohbli, guochunhai, wangshuai12, linux-kernel
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 11, 2026 at 12:16:56PM +0800, binglei wang wrote:
> erofs_bread() locates the target folio with
>
> index = (buf->off + offset) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
>
> but computes the in-folio offset without taking buf->off into account:
>
> return buf->base + (offset & ~PAGE_MASK);
>
> If buf->off is not page-aligned, the returned pointer misses the in-page
> component of buf->off, so callers end up fetching data from a wrong
> offset.
>
> buf->off is set to sbi->dif0.fsoff in erofs_init_metabuf(), and fsoff can
> be specified via the "fsoffset=" mount option, which only requires
> block-size alignment. Therefore, on an image with a sub-page block size
> (e.g. 512 bytes), a non-page-aligned fsoff (e.g. 512) triggers the issue,
> since 512 is a multiple of the block size but not of PAGE_SIZE.
>
> It can be reproduced by mounting an image that is placed at a
> non-page-aligned offset:
>
> mkfs.erofs -b512 -zlz4hc sub.erofs src/
> # prepend 512 bytes of padding to the image
> mount -t erofs -o loop,fsoffset=512 padded.erofs /mnt
>
> which fails with
>
> erofs (device loop0): cannot find valid erofs superblock
>
> because the on-disk superblock (at offset 1024 within the image, i.e.
> 1536 within the padded file) is read from a wrong in-folio offset. With
> this fixed, the very same image mounts successfully and its file contents
> match those read from the unpadded image.
>
> Fix it by including buf->off in the in-folio offset calculation, so that
> it is consistent with the folio index calculation.
>
> Fixes: c36ec00d7f67 ("erofs: add 'fsoffset' mount option to specify
> filesystem offset")
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 6.16+
> Signed-off-by: Binglei Wang <l3b2w1@gmail.com>
As I said, I applied a modified version:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/aqOBLWQEkH7_3LSu@XiangdeMacBook-Pro.local
I think if you have some email client issue, you could loop the patch to
your own email, download it from your mailbox and try to apply locally
for self-testing first.
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] erofs: fix unbalanced buf->off handling in erofs_bread()
[not found] <CAJ3C4KxqO2--RDZN7jCvYKOjwe-XSUcEj8w74ETeHV2ZUq_1dw@mail.gmail.com>
@ 2026-09-11 4:18 ` Gao Xiang
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Gao Xiang @ 2026-09-11 4:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: binglei wang
Cc: linux-erofs, xiang, chao, shengyong1, zbestahu, jefflexu,
dhavale, hongbohbli, guochunhai, wangshuai12, linux-kernel
Hi Binglei,
On Fri, Sep 11, 2026 at 12:01:48PM +0800, binglei wang wrote:
> erofs_bread() locates the target folio with
>
> index = (buf->off + offset) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
>
> but computes the in-folio offset without taking buf->off into account:
>
> return buf->base + (offset & ~PAGE_MASK);
>
> If buf->off is not page-aligned, the returned pointer misses the in-page
> component of buf->off, so callers end up fetching data from a wrong
> offset.
>
> buf->off is set to sbi->dif0.fsoff in erofs_init_metabuf(), and fsoff can
> be specified via the "fsoffset=" mount option, which only requires
> block-size alignment. Therefore, on an image with a sub-page block size
> (e.g. 512 bytes), a non-page-aligned fsoff (e.g. 512) triggers the issue,
> since 512 is a multiple of the block size but not of PAGE_SIZE.
>
> It can be reproduced by mounting an image that is placed at a
> non-page-aligned offset:
>
> mkfs.erofs -b512 -zlz4hc sub.erofs src/
> # prepend 512 bytes of padding to the image
> mount -t erofs -o loop,fsoffset=512 padded.erofs /mnt
>
> which fails with
>
> erofs (device loop0): cannot find valid erofs superblock
>
> because the on-disk superblock (at offset 1024 within the image, i.e.
> 1536 within the padded file) is read from a wrong in-folio offset. With
> this fixed, the very same image mounts successfully and its file contents
> match those read from the unpadded image.
>
> Fix it by including buf->off in the in-folio offset calculation, so that
> it is consistent with the folio index calculation.
>
> Fixes: c36ec00d7f67 ("erofs: add 'fsoffset' mount option to specify
> filesystem offset")
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 6.16+
> Signed-off-by: Binglei Wang <l3b2w1@gmail.com>
The fix looks fine, but the patch format is broken:
Reviewed-by: Gao Xiang <xiang@kernel.org>
I applied the following version manually with an updated
patch subject.
From 135d84c66f85426299db01a09d93a79a87af18ba Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Binglei Wang <l3b2w1@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 12:11:33 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] erofs: add missing buf->off in erofs_bread()
erofs_bread() locates the target folio with
index = (buf->off + offset) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
but computes the in-folio offset without taking buf->off into account:
return buf->base + (offset & ~PAGE_MASK);
If buf->off is not page-aligned, the returned pointer misses the in-page
component of buf->off, so callers end up fetching data from a wrong
offset.
buf->off is set to sbi->dif0.fsoff in erofs_init_metabuf(), and fsoff can
be specified via the "fsoffset=" mount option, which only requires
block-size alignment. Therefore, on an image with a sub-page block size
(e.g. 512 bytes), a non-page-aligned fsoff (e.g. 512) triggers the issue,
since 512 is a multiple of the block size but not of PAGE_SIZE.
It can be reproduced by mounting an image that is placed at a
non-page-aligned offset:
mkfs.erofs -b512 -zlz4hc sub.erofs src/
# prepend 512 bytes of padding to the image
mount -t erofs -o loop,fsoffset=512 padded.erofs /mnt
which fails with
erofs (device loop0): cannot find valid erofs superblock
because the on-disk superblock (at offset 1024 within the image, i.e.
1536 within the padded file) is read from a wrong in-folio offset. With
this fixed, the very same image mounts successfully and its file contents
match those read from the unpadded image.
Fix it by including buf->off in the in-folio offset calculation, so that
it is consistent with the folio index calculation.
Fixes: c36ec00d7f67 ("erofs: add 'fsoffset' mount option to specify filesystem offset")
Signed-off-by: Binglei Wang <l3b2w1@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Gao Xiang <xiang@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Gao Xiang <xiang@kernel.org>
---
fs/erofs/data.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/erofs/data.c b/fs/erofs/data.c
index 0885b1f2fc92..be63b89f0862 100644
--- a/fs/erofs/data.c
+++ b/fs/erofs/data.c
@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ void *erofs_bread(struct erofs_buf *buf, erofs_off_t offset, bool need_kmap)
return NULL;
if (!buf->base)
buf->base = kmap_local_page(buf->page);
- return buf->base + (offset & ~PAGE_MASK);
+ return buf->base + ((buf->off + offset) & ~PAGE_MASK);
}
int erofs_init_metabuf(struct erofs_buf *buf, struct super_block *sb,
--
2.47.3
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-09-12 9:26 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-09-12 2:57 [PATCH] erofs: fix unbalanced buf->off handling in erofs_bread() Binglei Wang
2026-09-12 9:25 ` Gao Xiang
[not found] <CAJ3C4Kwms2my+y_T0Mx+XM_gb9gs7cVZ7w4v2GRAURF1rRFU0g@mail.gmail.com>
2026-09-11 4:22 ` Gao Xiang
[not found] <CAJ3C4KxqO2--RDZN7jCvYKOjwe-XSUcEj8w74ETeHV2ZUq_1dw@mail.gmail.com>
2026-09-11 4:18 ` Gao Xiang
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®