Commit 40f2dd61 authored by Qu Wenruo's avatar Qu Wenruo Committed by Greg Kroah-Hartman

btrfs: tree-checker: Check level for leaves and nodes

commit f556faa4 upstream.

Although we have tree level check at tree read runtime, it's completely
based on its parent level.
We still need to do accurate level check to avoid invalid tree blocks
sneak into kernel space.

The check itself is simple, for leaf its level should always be 0.
For nodes its level should be in range [1, BTRFS_MAX_LEVEL - 1].
Signed-off-by: default avatarQu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarSu Yue <suy.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarDavid Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
[bwh: Backported to 4.4:
 - Pass root instead of fs_info to generic_err()
 - Adjust context]
Signed-off-by: default avatarBen Hutchings <ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: default avatarGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
parent 98620167
......@@ -447,6 +447,13 @@ static int check_leaf(struct btrfs_root *root, struct extent_buffer *leaf,
u32 nritems = btrfs_header_nritems(leaf);
int slot;
if (btrfs_header_level(leaf) != 0) {
generic_err(root, leaf, 0,
"invalid level for leaf, have %d expect 0",
btrfs_header_level(leaf));
return -EUCLEAN;
}
/*
* Extent buffers from a relocation tree have a owner field that
* corresponds to the subvolume tree they are based on. So just from an
......@@ -589,9 +596,16 @@ int btrfs_check_node(struct btrfs_root *root, struct extent_buffer *node)
unsigned long nr = btrfs_header_nritems(node);
struct btrfs_key key, next_key;
int slot;
int level = btrfs_header_level(node);
u64 bytenr;
int ret = 0;
if (level <= 0 || level >= BTRFS_MAX_LEVEL) {
generic_err(root, node, 0,
"invalid level for node, have %d expect [1, %d]",
level, BTRFS_MAX_LEVEL - 1);
return -EUCLEAN;
}
if (nr == 0 || nr > BTRFS_NODEPTRS_PER_BLOCK(root)) {
btrfs_crit(root->fs_info,
"corrupt node: root=%llu block=%llu, nritems too %s, have %lu expect range [1,%zu]",
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment