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 <[email protected]> > > > > 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 <[email protected]> > > Cc: [email protected] > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]> > > > +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
