On Sun, Sep 22, 2024 at 8:35 PM Christophe JAILLET
<christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Le 22/09/2024 à 13:00, Ghanshyam Agrawal a écrit :
In some cases, dn_numag may be greater than MAXAG which may
result in an array-index-out-of-bounds in dbNextAG. Added
a check to return an error code before we crash.
Reported-by: syzbot+808f3f84407f08a93022@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=808f3f84407f08a93022
Signed-off-by: Ghanshyam Agrawal <ghanshyam1898@xxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/jfs/jfs_imap.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/jfs/jfs_imap.c b/fs/jfs/jfs_imap.c
index 2ec35889ad24..5088da13e8f1 100644
--- a/fs/jfs/jfs_imap.c
+++ b/fs/jfs/jfs_imap.c
@@ -1360,6 +1360,9 @@ int diAlloc(struct inode *pip, bool dir, struct inode *ip)
if (agno < 0 || agno > dn_numag)
return -EIO;
+ if (unlikely(dn_numag > MAXAG))
Hi,
looking at other places with checks with MAXAG, I wonder if it should be >=?
CJ
+ return -EIO;
+
if (atomic_read(&JFS_SBI(pip->i_sb)->bmap->db_active[agno])) {
/*
* There is an open file actively growing. We want to
Hello Christophe,
Thanks for reviewing my code. I believe the greater than symbol I have
set is correct in this case.
Can you please check it thoroughly and letme know wny it should be >= ?
Thanks & Regards,
Ghanshyam Agrawal