From: Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com>
To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Heming Zhao <heming.zhao@suse.com>
Cc: Mark Fasheh <mark@fasheh.com>, Joel Becker <jlbec@evilplan.org>,
"ocfs2-devel@lists.linux.dev" <ocfs2-devel@lists.linux.dev>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] ocfs2: use the stored hash when checking xattr bucket collision
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2026 17:36:20 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <eb07fec3-58d5-4822-91c1-50675a8fabfa@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <sashiko-outbox-165102@kernel.org>
On 10/9/26 4:44 PM, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
> - [High] fs/ocfs2: xattr data corruption due to stale loc.xl_entry after bucket defrag
> --
>
> commit 6247b6061c7a43f1fbd44574fe532663a6b670bc
> Author: Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com>
>
> ocfs2: use the stored hash when checking xattr bucket collision
>
> This patch changes ocfs2_check_xattr_bucket_collision() to use the stored hash
> for existing entries when checking for bucket collisions during splits. It
> fixes an issue where unsigned hashes compared against legacy buckets reported
> no collision, leading to duplicate entries.
>
>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/xattr.c b/fs/ocfs2/xattr.c
>> index a428fe908116e..c5a39a7d43d07 100644
>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/xattr.c
>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/xattr.c
>
> [ ... ]
>
>> @@ -5993,10 +5992,18 @@ static int ocfs2_xattr_set_entry_index_block(struct inode *inode,
>> * the maximum number of collisions we will allow for then is
>> * one bucket's worth, so check it here whether we need to
>> * add a new bucket for the insert.
>> + *
>> + * An existing entry keeps the hash it was stored under, and that is
>> + * the hash a split has to work with. A new entry is stored under the
>> + * unsigned one, which is what ocfs2_xa_add_entry() will write.
>> */
>> - ret = ocfs2_check_xattr_bucket_collision(inode,
>> - xs->bucket,
>> - xi->xi_name);
>> + if (xs->not_found)
>> + name_hash = ocfs2_xattr_name_hash(inode, xi->xi_name,
>> + xi->xi_name_len);
>> + else
>> + name_hash = le32_to_cpu(xs->here->xe_name_hash);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> [Severity: High]
> If ocfs2_xattr_set_entry_bucket() fails with -ENOSPC after defragmentation,
> can this access a stale xs->here pointer?
>
> In ocfs2_xattr_set_entry_bucket(), loc.xl_entry is initialized to point
> directly to the target array element (xs->here):
>
> ocfs2_init_xattr_bucket_xa_loc(&loc, xs->bucket,
> xs->not_found ? NULL : xs->here);
>
> If ocfs2_xa_set() fails with -ENOSPC, it calls ocfs2_defrag_xattr_bucket(),
> which sorts the entries array by xe_name_hash:
>
> /* sort the entries by their name_hash. */
> sort(entries, le16_to_cpu(xh->xh_count),
> sizeof(struct ocfs2_xattr_entry),
> cmp_xe, NULL);
>
> Since sort() is unstable and hashes only cover the name suffix, identical-hash
> entries can be swapped. If they are swapped, loc.xl_entry and xs->here now
> point to the wrong xattr entry.
>
> The second ocfs2_xa_set() call then reuses the stale loc.xl_entry pointer
> without re-evaluating its position in the sorted array:
>
> ret = ocfs2_xa_set(&loc, xi, ctxt);
>
> Can this overwrite the wrong xattr's data on disk, causing data corruption?
>
> If the second ocfs2_xa_set() also fails with -ENOSPC, it returns to
> ocfs2_xattr_set_entry_index_block() where the patch now relies on the stale
> xs->here pointer to read the name_hash.
>
It seems unrelated to my patch.
Since the array is already sorted on xe_name_hash when defrag runs,
re-sorting on the same key can only permute within a run of equal
hashes. The pointer may denote a different entry, but not a different
hash.
The underlying bug is real and independent of my series: after defrag
permutes an equal-hash run, that second ocfs2_xa_set(&loc, ...) operates
on a different entry. I'd like this to be addressed in a separate
thread.
Thanks,
Joseph
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-09 9:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-09 8:29 [PATCH v2 0/3] ocfs2: deal with legacy signed name hash values Joseph Qi
2026-10-09 8:30 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] ocfs2: deal with legacy signed dir index " Joseph Qi
2026-10-09 8:30 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] ocfs2: use the stored hash when checking xattr bucket collision Joseph Qi
[not found] ` <sashiko-outbox-165102@kernel.org>
2026-10-09 9:36 ` Joseph Qi [this message]
2026-10-09 15:05 ` Heming Zhao
2026-10-09 15:08 ` Heming Zhao
2026-10-09 8:30 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] ocfs2: deal with legacy signed xattr name hash values Joseph Qi
[not found] ` <sashiko-outbox-165103@kernel.org>
2026-10-09 9:41 ` Joseph Qi
2026-10-09 15:09 ` Heming Zhao
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=eb07fec3-58d5-4822-91c1-50675a8fabfa@linux.alibaba.com \
--to=joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=heming.zhao@suse.com \
--cc=jlbec@evilplan.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark@fasheh.com \
--cc=ocfs2-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/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®