From: ZhaoLong Wang <wangzhaolong1@huawei.com>
To: <hughd@google.com>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: <linux-mm@kvack.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<chengzhihao1@huawei.com>, <wangzhaolong1@huawei.com>,
<yukuai3@huawei.com>, <yi.zhang@huawei.com>
Subject: [PATCH -next,v2] tmpfs: Fix the issue that the mount and remount results are inconsistent.
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 20:43:24 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220629124324.1640807-1-wangzhaolong1@huawei.com> (raw)
An undefined-behavior issue has not been completely fixed since commit
d14f5efadd84 ("tmpfs: fix undefined-behaviour in shmem_reconfigure()").
In the commit, check in the shmem_reconfigure() is added in remount
process to avoid the Ubsan problem. However, the check is not added to
the mount process.It cause the inconsistent results between mount
and remount. The operations to reproduce the problem in user mode
as follow:
If nr_blocks is set to 0x8000000000000000, the mounting is successful.
# mount tmpfs /dev/shm/ -t tmpfs -o nr_blocks=0x8000000000000000
However, when -o remount is used, the mount fails because of the
check in the shmem_reconfigure()
# mount tmpfs /dev/shm/ -t tmpfs -o remount,nr_blocks=0x8000000000000000
mount: /dev/shm: mount point not mounted or bad option.
Therefore, add checks in the shmem_parse_one() function and remove the
check in shmem_reconfigure() to avoid this problem.
Signed-off-by: ZhaoLong Wang <wangzhaolong1@huawei.com>
---
mm/shmem.c | 7 ++-----
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/shmem.c b/mm/shmem.c
index a6f565308133..b7f2d4a56867 100644
--- a/mm/shmem.c
+++ b/mm/shmem.c
@@ -3392,7 +3392,7 @@ static int shmem_parse_one(struct fs_context *fc, struct fs_parameter *param)
break;
case Opt_nr_blocks:
ctx->blocks = memparse(param->string, &rest);
- if (*rest)
+ if (*rest || ctx->blocks > S64_MAX)
goto bad_value;
ctx->seen |= SHMEM_SEEN_BLOCKS;
break;
@@ -3514,10 +3514,7 @@ static int shmem_reconfigure(struct fs_context *fc)
raw_spin_lock(&sbinfo->stat_lock);
inodes = sbinfo->max_inodes - sbinfo->free_inodes;
- if (ctx->blocks > S64_MAX) {
- err = "Number of blocks too large";
- goto out;
- }
+
if ((ctx->seen & SHMEM_SEEN_BLOCKS) && ctx->blocks) {
if (!sbinfo->max_blocks) {
err = "Cannot retroactively limit size";
--
2.31.1
reply other threads:[~2022-06-29 12:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220629124324.1640807-1-wangzhaolong1@huawei.com \
--to=wangzhaolong1@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chengzhihao1@huawei.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
--cc=yukuai3@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox