Does FI_INLINE_XATTR always assume FI_EXTRA_ATTR? Looking through the code, it's
not quite clear (at a first glance at least). If this is not so, I have a strong
suspicion that FI_INLINE_XATTR-related checks in sanity_check_inode() should be
moved to outer scope (outside of FI_EXTRA_ATTR check), i.e.:
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
index 282fd320bdb3..3061cf69a7fb 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
@@ -302,15 +302,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct
page *node_page)
F2FS_TOTAL_EXTRA_ATTR_SIZE);
return false;
}
- if (f2fs_sb_has_flexible_inline_xattr(sbi) &&
- f2fs_has_inline_xattr(inode) &&
- (!fi->i_inline_xattr_size ||
- fi->i_inline_xattr_size > MAX_INLINE_XATTR_SIZE)) {
- f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx) has corrupted
i_inline_xattr_size: %d, max: %lu",
- __func__, inode->i_ino,
fi->i_inline_xattr_size,
- MAX_INLINE_XATTR_SIZE);
- return false;
- }
+
if (f2fs_sb_has_compression(sbi) &&
fi->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL &&
F2FS_FITS_IN_INODE(ri, fi->i_extra_isize,
@@ -320,6 +312,16 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct
page *node_page)
}
}
+ if (f2fs_sb_has_flexible_inline_xattr(sbi) &&
+ f2fs_has_inline_xattr(inode) &&
+ (!fi->i_inline_xattr_size ||
+ fi->i_inline_xattr_size > MAX_INLINE_XATTR_SIZE)) {
+ f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx) has corrupted
i_inline_xattr_size: %d, max: %lu",
+ __func__, inode->i_ino, fi->i_inline_xattr_size,
+ MAX_INLINE_XATTR_SIZE);
+ return false;
+ }
+
if (!f2fs_sb_has_extra_attr(sbi)) {
if (f2fs_sb_has_project_quota(sbi)) {
f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: corrupted inode ino=%lx, wrong feature
flag: %u, run fsck to fix.",
(Looking around https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=e4876215632c2d23b481).
Dmitry
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
