From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=1aD4=BN=lists.ozlabs.org=linux-erofs-bounces+linux-erofs=archiver.kernel.org@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SIGNED_OFF_BY,
	SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4A97C433E3
	for <linux-erofs@archiver.kernel.org>; Mon,  3 Aug 2020 12:27:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6068A204EC
	for <linux-erofs@archiver.kernel.org>; Mon,  3 Aug 2020 12:27:02 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6068A204EC
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-erofs-bounces+linux-erofs=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3])
	by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BKxw40QfNzDqVC
	for <linux-erofs@archiver.kernel.org>; Mon,  3 Aug 2020 22:27:00 +1000 (AEST)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized)
 smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com (client-ip=45.249.212.32; helo=huawei.com;
 envelope-from=yuchao0@huawei.com; receiver=<UNKNOWN>)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org;
 dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com
Received: from huawei.com (szxga06-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.32])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BKxvj2Rq6zDqSl
 for <linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org>; Mon,  3 Aug 2020 22:26:37 +1000 (AEST)
Received: from DGGEMS403-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59])
 by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 6BD612846B9A9A6760EE;
 Mon,  3 Aug 2020 20:26:27 +0800 (CST)
Received: from [10.164.122.247] (10.164.122.247) by smtp.huawei.com
 (10.3.19.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.487.0; Mon, 3 Aug 2020
 20:26:22 +0800
Subject: Re: [PATCH] erofs: fix extended inode could cross boundary
To: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@redhat.com>, <linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org>
References: <20200729175801.GA23973@xiangao.remote.csb>
From: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <54db9f70-5c4e-8ba4-0a14-ff6b792fe5b4@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 20:26:22 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200729175801.GA23973@xiangao.remote.csb>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.164.122.247]
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-BeenThere: linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Development of Linux EROFS file system <linux-erofs.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linux-erofs>,
 <mailto:linux-erofs-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linux-erofs/>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-erofs-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linux-erofs>,
 <mailto:linux-erofs-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, stable@vger.kernel.org
Errors-To: linux-erofs-bounces+linux-erofs=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Sender: "Linux-erofs"
 <linux-erofs-bounces+linux-erofs=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org>

On 2020/7/30 1:58, Gao Xiang wrote:
> Each ondisk inode should be aligned with inode slot boundary
> (32-byte alignment) because of nid calculation formula, so all
> compact inodes (32 byte) cannot across page boundary. However,
> extended inode is now 64-byte form, which can across page boundary
> in principle if the location is specified on purpose, although
> it's hard to be generated by mkfs due to the allocation policy
> and rarely used by Android use case now mainly for > 4GiB files.
> 
> For now, only two fields `i_ctime_nsec` and `i_nlink' couldn't
> be read from disk properly and cause out-of-bound memory read
> with random value.
> 
> Let's fix now.
> 
> Fixes: 431339ba9042 ("staging: erofs: add inode operations")
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 4.19+
> Signed-off-by: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@redhat.com>

Reviewed-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>

Thanks,