[05/21] xfs: distinguish between corrupt inode and invalid inum in xfs_scrub_get_inode

Commit Message

Darrick J. Wong Dec. 23, 2017, 12:43 a.m. UTC

From: Darrick J. Wong <[e-mail]>

In xfs_scrub_get_inode, we don't do a good enough job distinguishing
EINVAL returns from xfs_iget w/ IGET_UNTRUSTED -- this can happen if the
passed in inode number is invalid (past eofs, inobt says it isn't an
inode) or if the inum is actually valid but the inode buffer fails
verifier.  In the first case we still want to return ENOENT, but in the
second case we want to capture the corruption error.

Therefore, if xfs_iget returns EINVAL, try the raw imap lookup.  If that
succeeds, we conclude it's a corruption error, otherwise we just bounce
out to userspace.

Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <[e-mail]>
---
 fs/xfs/scrub/common.c |   32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
the body of a message to [e-mail]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Comments

Dave Chinner Jan. 5, 2018, 1:23 a.m. UTC | #1

On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 04:43:20PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> From: Darrick J. Wong <[e-mail]>
> 
> In xfs_scrub_get_inode, we don't do a good enough job distinguishing
> EINVAL returns from xfs_iget w/ IGET_UNTRUSTED -- this can happen if the
> passed in inode number is invalid (past eofs, inobt says it isn't an
> inode) or if the inum is actually valid but the inode buffer fails
> verifier.  In the first case we still want to return ENOENT, but in the
> second case we want to capture the corruption error.
> 
> Therefore, if xfs_iget returns EINVAL, try the raw imap lookup.  If that
> succeeds, we conclude it's a corruption error, otherwise we just bounce
> out to userspace.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <[e-mail]>

Looks fine - it's in an error path so isn't going to affect anything
in the common "everything is fine" case.

Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <[e-mail]>

Patch

diff --git a/fs/xfs/scrub/common.c b/fs/xfs/scrub/common.c
index 6ec4e10..d5c37d8 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/scrub/common.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/scrub/common.c
@@ -503,6 +503,7 @@  xfs_scrub_get_inode(
 	struct xfs_scrub_context	*sc,
 	struct xfs_inode		*ip_in)
 {
+	struct xfs_imap			imap;
 	struct xfs_mount		*mp = sc->mp;
 	struct xfs_inode		*ip = NULL;
 	int				error;
@@ -518,10 +519,33 @@  xfs_scrub_get_inode(
 		return -ENOENT;
 	error = xfs_iget(mp, NULL, sc->sm->sm_ino,
 			XFS_IGET_UNTRUSTED | XFS_IGET_DONTCACHE, 0, &ip);
-	if (error == -ENOENT || error == -EINVAL) {
-		/* inode doesn't exist... */
-		return -ENOENT;
-	} else if (error) {
+	switch (error) {
+	case -ENOENT:
+		/* Inode doesn't exist, just bail out. */
+		return error;
+	case 0:
+		/* Got an inode, continue. */
+		break;
+	case -EINVAL:
+		/*
+		 * -EINVAL with IGET_UNTRUSTED could mean one of several
+		 * things: userspace gave us an inode number that doesn't
+		 * correspond to fs space, or doesn't have an inobt entry;
+		 * or it could simply mean that the inode buffer failed the
+		 * read verifiers.
+		 *
+		 * Try just the inode mapping lookup -- if it succeeds, then
+		 * the inode buffer verifier failed and something needs fixing.
+		 * Otherwise, we really couldn't find it so tell userspace
+		 * that it no longer exists.
+		 */
+		error = xfs_imap(sc->mp, sc->tp, sc->sm->sm_ino, &imap,
+				XFS_IGET_UNTRUSTED | XFS_IGET_DONTCACHE);
+		if (error)
+			return -ENOENT;
+		error = -EFSCORRUPTED;
+		/* fall through */
+	default:
 		trace_xfs_scrub_op_error(sc,
 				XFS_INO_TO_AGNO(mp, sc->sm->sm_ino),
 				XFS_INO_TO_AGBNO(mp, sc->sm->sm_ino),