From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out162-62-57-210.mail.qq.com (out162-62-57-210.mail.qq.com [162.62.57.210]) (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 BD2C215C147 for ; Wed, 16 Oct 2024 03:57:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=162.62.57.210 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729051031; cv=none; b=ij+psuSOx89JIsEMNY/MVsrFRfdwLJKsIXpn1lRD196CZaFYG4aQbUWWzjpfZK/fBejMf19BkIXueJ8MXF5UAD7JoeCQGxgWeyvlMdFKUpNqi6tmkeg49cLnb4JGn6kz/l/WglsKpO4cipAXmareKV5yCtR1y9HkeDlHZ/3vIUM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729051031; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ddcPAMOhauFbTosK03eLk2C7PjG9TXIoiVAqKTyH2a0=; h=Message-ID:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=KaLYNSGuKQA1UHsTkilMIY28GPPYHXjSCHayILChJpNlCRw2R8Ed/lUBSdg4k0AmdyTC4CkRPBRZtlGGT4hMfeOJjTyoJkmwV2GPFcrkhRP4FRpH1P1zMVEB1T+69xHXlFiKYA+jCnrpuu2p9qw7gyYgvUhIVQGObh0BGZOULMY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=qq.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qq.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=qq.com header.i=@qq.com header.b=uXICaOKz; arc=none smtp.client-ip=162.62.57.210 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=qq.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qq.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=qq.com header.i=@qq.com header.b="uXICaOKz" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=qq.com; s=s201512; t=1729050723; bh=RuMoHt6kpoDSUfCbf5yhdUamiOaStOUgGPzXLNZwr1g=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=uXICaOKzv/iNAHNkzsUFwAMJCNf6Wh2aDatk9ChxnA/4WII9CrhyuRsKpL/3dVFeD oI6R47n2RI/7wTbf9pCtIAQvI/NjSMdJWFoMZ/CodZs74nrE+dpCgQ0FCYo2IhUoZc /uADyaciFQnaEyqoSr/cAw2aNqWb3oxwFcDu4I3M= Received: from pek-lxu-l1.wrs.com ([111.198.224.50]) by newxmesmtplogicsvrsza29-0.qq.com (NewEsmtp) with SMTP id D013648B; Wed, 16 Oct 2024 11:52:01 +0800 X-QQ-mid: xmsmtpt1729050721tuuj4205k Message-ID: X-QQ-XMAILINFO: M0yQCYO1Pk4Brlrp4c+bnLAZGdVRkprwaojPl/ktyo1syLNQUbly1usBVHvvwv k+bC1rAJ76gJUscPUNiodhN5f0eEMHs2K/KlyBKIHG8samJA9bodrBva4YTq/D+hvcLNKpBKGgtR 1M6xrnYwL8W0JLBr8ZIDl6tP+dVVqg2OUJ9YWMu1UL/hS3QkdYuJHEUdw/aG+1tn6BHb2QNLrgFf c2KG8RZKou0SP4q/G7EWyXiHqE5C/n3GcScTkoCp6QNFwmEQLoZff+53m/C1slu2UTeeQhWtrPH7 m8tZuGIQIjPnXWQ3nyr+/PM9gYh/1Ct9qrSdL8VIctGjszJGcp52gHEKGv5+/t3CWIG+Fd5g4rww /x9Kxa5lD0QgFbSCWiYdm1WBQUwoijyO+uy04L2p/1u8RKpRlhQ40kPzfx55F2bhvdgY7/4jQml/ 57C5NpPK+mFt8qEm6zbVaKYaF3LSwRsTA80cy+J4hJxIQkxIWi9sFysufgIKPLkMpHTtQN8PK8oU 3Z5OS9gNrax5PDbjJrYWeF3YJpqkWGSYPUyEr1FqZwwNLLAEuMOmvMVeoVC6BEa+2K64PvfLXvBs GMLV8Ezyx4rNi/sTMDoUBbFq3C0PI6s27DohG5yE5ftreFOeKMmO9PpPgEEIz5syEXmz6ZlHX3lD 2CIuXp5L1B23IWDzC5Uxl1711Zd3x/7pRpdeern6pOVx5u4b1zaK+41MpDsjjsP7VzxY2oBM2F8B GZL3oUh/BEEt+OagayF2HF4xgYcjble1bRUCVoekCAYA89C+b8hhi5rYzHQjC8aoDAihJmMW6vYM J9UuPoq0m3SKCdXT4LfpThNPY0rlxb7evser+od5EHkC2FDclPSa6mf3t8K3eXevL60mmt3m/NSH Jxeq/br8Vj/QH7lbqZZlE06/PuON1aYsO8qC3UUP7O0pkOKFX20x+fdW3NSO2+GnJZeR5rk9I6zW WMBZWQi8MzD/eHebW18EzXPc/qFQDkc7gUgSv4ZXi+aKZ65MVzxqJZ6U9aP4Jv X-QQ-XMRINFO: MPJ6Tf5t3I/ycC2BItcBVIA= From: Edward Adam Davis To: joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com Cc: eadavis@qq.com, jlbec@evilplan.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mark@fasheh.com, ocfs2-devel@lists.linux.dev, syzbot+797d4829dafe3f11dce7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] ocfs2: add a sanity check for i_size Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 11:52:01 +0800 X-OQ-MSGID: <20241016035200.451531-2-eadavis@qq.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.0 In-Reply-To: <8947c80d-9fed-4269-8a56-080d4afa782b@linux.alibaba.com> References: <8947c80d-9fed-4269-8a56-080d4afa782b@linux.alibaba.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Wed, 16 Oct 2024 10:06:27 +0800, Joseph Qi wrote: > > Reported-and-tested-by: syzbot+797d4829dafe3f11dce7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com > > Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=797d4829dafe3f11dce7 > > Signed-off-by: Edward Adam Davis > > --- > > V1 -> V2: keep rc to 0 when falgs contains READHEAD > > V2 -> V3: check i_size only and alert subject and comments > > > > fs/ocfs2/extent_map.c | 6 +++++- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > #syz test > > > > diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/extent_map.c b/fs/ocfs2/extent_map.c > > index f7672472fa82..29d27a70dbdd 100644 > > --- a/fs/ocfs2/extent_map.c > > +++ b/fs/ocfs2/extent_map.c > > @@ -961,13 +961,17 @@ int ocfs2_read_virt_blocks(struct inode *inode, u64 v_block, int nr, > > int rc = 0; > > u64 p_block, p_count; > > int i, count, done = 0; > > + loff_t i_size = i_size_read(inode); > > > > trace_ocfs2_read_virt_blocks( > > inode, (unsigned long long)v_block, nr, bhs, flags, > > validate); > > > > + if (!i_size) > > + return -EINVAL; > > + > > Take a more consideration, inode size 0 doesn't mean it has no blocks, > since we have a case that fallocate with KEEP_SIZE. > Could you please check inode->i_blocks in above coredump? I have previously verified the value of inode->i_blocks in my testing environment, which is 0. BR, Edward