On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 11:18:59AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Mon 2019-05-20 14:14:13, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
From: Theodore Ts'o tytso@mit.edu
commit 345c0dbf3a30872d9b204db96b5857cd00808cae upstream.
Add the blocks which belong to the journal inode to block_validity's system zone so attempts to deallocate or overwrite the journal due a corrupted file system where the journal blocks are also claimed by another inode.
Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=202879 Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o tytso@mit.edu Cc: stable@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
+static int ext4_protect_reserved_inode(struct super_block *sb, u32 ino) +{
- struct inode *inode;
- struct ext4_sb_info *sbi = EXT4_SB(sb);
- struct ext4_map_blocks map;
- u32 i = 0, err = 0, num, n;
- if ((ino < EXT4_ROOT_INO) ||
(ino > le32_to_cpu(sbi->s_es->s_inodes_count)))return -EINVAL;- inode = ext4_iget(sb, ino, EXT4_IGET_SPECIAL);
- if (IS_ERR(inode))
return PTR_ERR(inode);- num = (inode->i_size + sb->s_blocksize - 1) >> sb->s_blocksize_bits;
- while (i < num) {
map.m_lblk = i;map.m_len = num - i;n = ext4_map_blocks(NULL, inode, &map, 0);if (n < 0) {err = n;break;}n is unsigned, so this can not happen. Commit 102/ actually fixes this up. Should they be merged together?
No, we keep things identical to how they are upstream, otherwise it is impossible to keep track of what happened here.
This patch, and 2 others were dropped anyway, so you don't have to worry about it :)
greg k-h