6.6-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Filipe Manana fdmanana@suse.com
[ Upstream commit 54a7081ed168b72a8a2d6ef4ba3a1259705a2926 ]
At __inode_add_ref() when processing extrefs, if we jump into the next label we have an undefined value of victim_name.len, since we haven't initialized it before we did the goto. This results in an invalid memory access in the next iteration of the loop since victim_name.len was not initialized to the length of the name of the current extref.
Fix this by initializing victim_name.len with the current extref's name length.
Fixes: e43eec81c516 ("btrfs: use struct qstr instead of name and namelen pairs") Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo wqu@suse.com Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana fdmanana@suse.com Signed-off-by: David Sterba dsterba@suse.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org --- fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c index 6dbb62f83f8c8..13377c3b22897 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c @@ -1162,13 +1162,13 @@ static inline int __add_inode_ref(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, struct fscrypt_str victim_name;
extref = (struct btrfs_inode_extref *)(base + cur_offset); + victim_name.len = btrfs_inode_extref_name_len(leaf, extref);
if (btrfs_inode_extref_parent(leaf, extref) != parent_objectid) goto next;
ret = read_alloc_one_name(leaf, &extref->name, - btrfs_inode_extref_name_len(leaf, extref), - &victim_name); + victim_name.len, &victim_name); if (ret) return ret;