summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/fs/btrfs
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorFilipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>2016-07-02 05:43:46 +0100
committerFilipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>2016-08-01 07:26:15 +0100
commit15b253eace1f98dabbc6e03f6793fcf8603b1655 (patch)
tree16ad0cc9e5aa90ee47e7200bfa0c1693b0268453 /fs/btrfs
parent764433a12e78e1a2161793c02eceafdfed2d652b (diff)
Btrfs: send, avoid incorrect leaf accesses when sending utimes operations
The caller of send_utimes() is supposed to be sure that the inode number it passes to this function does actually exists in the send snapshot. However due to logic/algorithm bugs (such as the one fixed by the patch titled "Btrfs: send, fix invalid leaf accesses due to incorrect utimes operations"), this might not be the case and when that happens it makes send_utimes() access use an unrelated leaf item as the target inode item or access beyond a leaf's boundaries (when the leaf is full and path->slots[0] matches the number of items in the leaf). So if the call to btrfs_search_slot() done by send_utimes() does not find the inode item, just make sure send_utimes() returns -ENOENT and does not silently accesses unrelated leaf items or does invalid leaf accesses, also allowing us to easialy and deterministically catch such algorithmic/logic bugs. Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'fs/btrfs')
-rw-r--r--fs/btrfs/send.c2
1 files changed, 2 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/send.c b/fs/btrfs/send.c
index 8b653967b163..2db8dc89ca41 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/send.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/send.c
@@ -2502,6 +2502,8 @@ verbose_printk("btrfs: send_utimes %llu\n", ino);
key.type = BTRFS_INODE_ITEM_KEY;
key.offset = 0;
ret = btrfs_search_slot(NULL, sctx->send_root, &key, path, 0, 0);
+ if (ret > 0)
+ ret = -ENOENT;
if (ret < 0)
goto out;