On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 03:16:36PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 05:22:57PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
> > During updating btree, we could push items between sibling
> > nodes/leaves, for leaves data sections starts reversely from
> > the end of the block while for nodes we only have key pairs
> > which are stored one by one from the start of the block.
> >
> > So we could do try to push key pairs from one node to the next
> > node right in the tree, and after that, we update the node's
> > nritems to reflect the correct end while leaving the stale
> > content in the node. One may intentionally corrupt the fs
> > image and access the stale content by bumping the nritems and
> > causes various crashes.
> >
> > This takes the in-memory @nritems as the correct one and
> > gets to memset the unused part of a btree node.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@xxxxxxxx>
>
> > ---
> > fs/btrfs/extent_io.c | 11 +++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c b/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c
> > index c2325c3..56c9dee 100644
> > --- a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c
> > +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c
> > @@ -3732,6 +3732,17 @@ static noinline_for_stack int write_one_eb(struct extent_buffer *eb,
> > if (btrfs_header_owner(eb) == BTRFS_TREE_LOG_OBJECTID)
> > bio_flags = EXTENT_BIO_TREE_LOG;
> >
> > + /* set btree node beyond nritems with 0 to avoid stale content */
> > + if (btrfs_header_level(eb) > 0) {
>
> We can do the same for leaves.
In theory, the problem also applies for leaves, but I haven't got a
reproducer for leaf case.
So I'll update a v2 with leaf memset, please review that part more
carefully :)
Thanks,
-liubo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
