From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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=-7.7 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham 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 051A5C04EB9 for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2018 14:48:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD64A2146D for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2018 14:48:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1544107707; bh=eBA7gT3Rd+0e4dfnuM6juCumTJZnPnpfDIrWxFEtQM8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:List-ID:From; b=CQ+ZnB2e+PwkAxMQQopLKjI/ghzk5GZG4ThyjNbIKHO+W8Xl6sAGaop0RlmoNT5tP F/KEPGn0zeCZKBu/z9gzzkciRjVQzjjbuPAWBLL6MPUBinCRBT3XXPJxncJ529fem1 Kt1juMeCw0Ut04euI0nx19FnOFwwm/TQXVuonv7o= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org BD64A2146D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linuxfoundation.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731598AbeLFOs0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Dec 2018 09:48:26 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:53590 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731122AbeLFOsY (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Dec 2018 09:48:24 -0500 Received: from localhost (5356596B.cm-6-7b.dynamic.ziggo.nl [83.86.89.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E389E2082B; Thu, 6 Dec 2018 14:48:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1544107703; bh=eBA7gT3Rd+0e4dfnuM6juCumTJZnPnpfDIrWxFEtQM8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=cxt+0v3TIqZ7n8rAebwz49G5iY8bF0gTnnH5MJYIyEdSjCYuzfwO8b39nBZENmHLv UDqiwNJyi4CjjtPotKCilYk0669kQ3DyDl5+Dc5b86FVkzJ9+Ts+s4dWDgL83E9CPg phw9oW4+4gi7O5/BBWt339PNIHolKdGCONG/Y+r0= From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , stable@vger.kernel.org, Xu Wen , Qu Wenruo , Su Yue , David Sterba , Ben Hutchings Subject: [PATCH 4.9 080/101] btrfs: Check that each block group has corresponding chunk at mount time Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 15:39:19 +0100 Message-Id: <20181206143016.797837482@linuxfoundation.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.19.2 In-Reply-To: <20181206143011.174892052@linuxfoundation.org> References: <20181206143011.174892052@linuxfoundation.org> User-Agent: quilt/0.65 X-stable: review X-Patchwork-Hint: ignore MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 4.9-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Qu Wenruo commit 514c7dca85a0bf40be984dab0b477403a6db901f upstream. A crafted btrfs image with incorrect chunk<->block group mapping will trigger a lot of unexpected things as the mapping is essential. Although the problem can be caught by block group item checker added in "btrfs: tree-checker: Verify block_group_item", it's still not sufficient. A sufficiently valid block group item can pass the check added by the mentioned patch but could fail to match the existing chunk. This patch will add extra block group -> chunk mapping check, to ensure we have a completely matching (start, len, flags) chunk for each block group at mount time. Here we reuse the original helper find_first_block_group(), which is already doing the basic bg -> chunk checks, adding further checks of the start/len and type flags. Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=199837 Reported-by: Xu Wen Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo Reviewed-by: Su Yue Reviewed-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: David Sterba [bwh: Backported to 4.9: Use root->fs_info instead of fs_info] Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) --- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c @@ -9896,6 +9896,8 @@ static int find_first_block_group(struct int ret = 0; struct btrfs_key found_key; struct extent_buffer *leaf; + struct btrfs_block_group_item bg; + u64 flags; int slot; ret = btrfs_search_slot(NULL, root, key, path, 0, 0); @@ -9930,8 +9932,32 @@ static int find_first_block_group(struct "logical %llu len %llu found bg but no related chunk", found_key.objectid, found_key.offset); ret = -ENOENT; + } else if (em->start != found_key.objectid || + em->len != found_key.offset) { + btrfs_err(root->fs_info, + "block group %llu len %llu mismatch with chunk %llu len %llu", + found_key.objectid, found_key.offset, + em->start, em->len); + ret = -EUCLEAN; } else { - ret = 0; + read_extent_buffer(leaf, &bg, + btrfs_item_ptr_offset(leaf, slot), + sizeof(bg)); + flags = btrfs_block_group_flags(&bg) & + BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_TYPE_MASK; + + if (flags != (em->map_lookup->type & + BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_TYPE_MASK)) { + btrfs_err(root->fs_info, +"block group %llu len %llu type flags 0x%llx mismatch with chunk type flags 0x%llx", + found_key.objectid, + found_key.offset, flags, + (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_TYPE_MASK & + em->map_lookup->type)); + ret = -EUCLEAN; + } else { + ret = 0; + } } free_extent_map(em); goto out;