| /openbmc/linux/fs/btrfs/ |
| H A D | ref-verify.c | 581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
|
| H A D | print-tree.c | 581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
|
| H A D | disk-io.h | 581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
|
| H A D | qgroup.c | 581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
|
| H A D | relocation.c | 581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
|
| H A D | ctree.c | 581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
|
| H A D | backref.c | 581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
|
| H A D | tree-log.c | 581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
|
| H A D | disk-io.c | 581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
|
| H A D | extent-tree.c | 581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
581c1760 Wed Mar 28 20:08:11 CDT 2018 Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> btrfs: Validate child tree block's level and first key
We have several reports about node pointer points to incorrect child
tree blocks, which could have even wrong owner and level but still with
valid generation and checksum.
Although btrfs check could handle it and print error message like:
leaf parent key incorrect 60670574592
Kernel doesn't have enough check on this type of corruption correctly.
At least add such check to read_tree_block() and btrfs_read_buffer(),
where we need two new parameters @level and @first_key to verify the
child tree block.
The new @level check is mandatory and all call sites are already
modified to extract expected level from its call chain.
While @first_key is optional, the following call sites are skipping such
check:
1) Root node/leaf
As ROOT_ITEM doesn't contain the first key, skip @first_key check.
2) Direct backref
Only parent bytenr and level is known and we need to resolve the key
all by ourselves, skip @first_key check.
Another note of this verification is, it needs extra info from nodeptr
or ROOT_ITEM, so it can't fit into current tree-checker framework, which
is limited to node/leaf boundary.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
|