From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sandeen.net ([63.231.237.45]:38556 "EHLO sandeen.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751561AbeEDSUn (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 May 2018 14:20:43 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] xfs_repair: examine all remote attribute blocks References: <152401958920.13319.10756339531174871801.stgit@magnolia> <152401959780.13319.9582448473529615015.stgit@magnolia> From: Eric Sandeen Message-ID: Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 13:20:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <152401959780.13319.9582448473529615015.stgit@magnolia> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: "Darrick J. Wong" , sandeen@redhat.com Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On 4/17/18 9:46 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > From: Darrick J. Wong > > Examine all remote xattr values of a file, not just the XFS_ATTR_ROOT > values. This enables us to detect and zap corrupt user xattrs, as > tested by xfs/404. > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong Whoa. ;) Where'd this come from? At first glance it seems crazy to only check XFS_ATTR_ROOT but then I stated digging a little... This is essentially akin to other code we still have in the local case, /* Only check values for root security attributes */ if (entry->flags & XFS_ATTR_ROOT) { if (valuecheck(mp, (char *)&local->nameval[0], NULL, local->namelen, be16_to_cpu(local->valuelen))) { do_warn( _("bad security value for attribute entry %d in attr block %u, inode %" PRIu64 "\n"), i, da_bno, ino); return -1; } } soooo this patch essentially allows valuecheck on !XFS_ATTR_ROOT attributes, but valuecheck says: * Calls will be made to xfs_mac_valid or xfs_acl_valid routines if the * security attributes exist. They will be cleared if invalid. * No other values will be checked. So, um, what's actually getting fixed? Ah, ok: this also allows us to simply try to /get/ the remote attribute: rmtval_get() and if that fails: do_warn( _("remote attribute get failed for entry %d, inode %" PRIu64 "\n"), i, ino); goto bad_free_out; we zap it. So ... uh... I think you want to /move/ the XFS_ATTR_ROOT check before the call to valuecheck(), rather than removing it entirely. Ok, at this rate I'll have all 11 patches done by June. -Eric > --- > repair/attr_repair.c | 3 --- > 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) > > > diff --git a/repair/attr_repair.c b/repair/attr_repair.c > index 8b1b8a7..bb5ab3d 100644 > --- a/repair/attr_repair.c > +++ b/repair/attr_repair.c > @@ -537,9 +537,6 @@ process_leaf_attr_remote( > return -1; > } > > - if (!(entry->flags & XFS_ATTR_ROOT)) > - goto out; > - > value = malloc(be32_to_cpu(remotep->valuelen)); > if (value == NULL) { > do_warn( > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >