From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from dggsgout12.his.huawei.com (dggsgout12.his.huawei.com [45.249.212.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D3092DC779; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 03:32:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.56 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745983934; cv=none; b=TYejyHJVI6i36L9KD+uteL2ZiE80njc4GXeXbfRvX7kEIImr8zxcnOdcl9/lDbzyHppI/lPIpsghp44aDq59bq1tI5XoFvTFIW5Pyi1gpruCDXW/esSjrcWZViO5yxaZ14q3WPExShkHoqa9cGwZEQCBOqGxXY6YACeKxQ6DFcg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745983934; c=relaxed/simple; bh=H2UhrZEQZYSQD8PmoSwzZt/cwIH9CInE+ZKnFlyBor8=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=SNql1w+AbRRPo/4yAv/MHLcB7VKPEAE3q2oF6bWjnIH6S4Om4Omd8QJXFx8AGc7QXBKVpzEVbfOeyiy1Euzdy0nEqhOjTgC/D3fD4ulq1KbJ/no66a9tEKhNUvBH4pCp/VgTzKHhAZst6zQKQwQWsUxf/uiLBFQhMi6lbudbf7Q= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huaweicloud.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huaweicloud.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.56 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huaweicloud.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huaweicloud.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.216]) by dggsgout12.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4ZnN5V5l9Vz4f3knp; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 11:31:42 +0800 (CST) Received: from mail02.huawei.com (unknown [10.116.40.128]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0330E1A1A62; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 11:32:07 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.179.80] (unknown [10.174.179.80]) by APP4 (Coremail) with SMTP id gCh0CgDHKl+1mRFoU3PtKw--.8628S3; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 11:32:06 +0800 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 11:32:04 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] ext4: ensure i_size is smaller than maxbytes To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu, adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, jack@suse.cz, wanghaichi0403@gmail.com, yi.zhang@huawei.com, libaokun1@huawei.com, yukuai3@huawei.com, yangerkun@huawei.com References: <20250430011301.1106457-1-yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com> <20250430011301.1106457-4-yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Zhang Yi In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CM-TRANSID:gCh0CgDHKl+1mRFoU3PtKw--.8628S3 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjDUn29KB7ZKAUJUUUUU529EdanIXcx71UUUUU7v73 VFW2AGmfu7bjvjm3AaLaJ3UjIYCTnIWjp_UUUYs7kC6x804xWl14x267AKxVW8JVW5JwAF c2x0x2IEx4CE42xK8VAvwI8IcIk0rVWrJVCq3wAFIxvE14AKwVWUJVWUGwA2ocxC64kIII 0Yj41l84x0c7CEw4AK67xGY2AK021l84ACjcxK6xIIjxv20xvE14v26F1j6w1UM28EF7xv wVC0I7IYx2IY6xkF7I0E14v26F4j6r4UJwA2z4x0Y4vEx4A2jsIE14v26rxl6s0DM28EF7 xvwVC2z280aVCY1x0267AKxVW0oVCq3wAS0I0E0xvYzxvE52x082IY62kv0487Mc02F40E FcxC0VAKzVAqx4xG6I80ewAv7VC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUJVWUGwAv7VC2z280aVAFwI0_Jr 0_Gr1lOx8S6xCaFVCjc4AY6r1j6r4UM4x0Y48IcVAKI48JM4IIrI8v6xkF7I0E8cxan2IY 04v7MxAIw28IcxkI7VAKI48JMxAqzxv26xkF7I0En4kS14v26r1q6r43MxC20s026xCaFV Cjc4AY6r1j6r4UMI8I3I0E5I8CrVAFwI0_Jr0_Jr4lx2IqxVCjr7xvwVAFwI0_JrI_JrWl x4CE17CEb7AF67AKxVWUtVW8ZwCIc40Y0x0EwIxGrwCI42IY6xIIjxv20xvE14v26r1j6r 1xMIIF0xvE2Ix0cI8IcVCY1x0267AKxVW8JVWxJwCI42IY6xAIw20EY4v20xvaj40_Jr0_ JF4lIxAIcVC2z280aVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lIxAIcVC2z280aVCY1x0267AKxVW8JVW8JrUvcS sGvfC2KfnxnUUI43ZEXa7IU1zuWJUUUUU== X-CM-SenderInfo: d1lo6xhdqjqx5xdzvxpfor3voofrz/ On 2025/4/30 11:20, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 09:13:01AM +0800, Zhang Yi wrote: >> From: Zhang Yi >> >> The inode i_size cannot be larger than maxbytes, check it while loading >> inode from the disk. > > With this patch, why do we need patch 1? The max_end in ext4_punch_hole() is maxbytes - blocksize. Therefore, without the patch 1, it is still possible to encounter a negative length if the offset exceeds max_end but is less than an i_size that also exceeds max_end. max_end i_size max_bytes | | | 0------------------------------------ | offset Thanks, Yi.