fs/overlayfs/namei.c | 7 +++++++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
Ensure that the lookup operation is present for the inode in the overlay
filesystem. If the operation is missing, log a warning and return an EIO
error to prevent further issues in the lookup process.
Reported-by: syzbot+a8c9d476508bd14a90e5@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=a8c9d476508bd14a90e5
Signed-off-by: Vasiliy Kovalev <kovalev@altlinux.org>
---
fs/overlayfs/namei.c | 7 +++++++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/namei.c b/fs/overlayfs/namei.c
index 5764f91d283e7..a73f37e401cf0 100644
--- a/fs/overlayfs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/overlayfs/namei.c
@@ -1115,6 +1115,13 @@ struct dentry *ovl_lookup(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
for (i = 0; !d.stop && i < ovl_numlower(poe); i++) {
struct ovl_path lower = ovl_lowerstack(poe)[i];
+ if (!lower.dentry->d_inode->i_op->lookup) {
+ err = -EIO;
+ pr_warn_ratelimited("missing lookup operation for inode %p\n",
+ lower.dentry->d_inode);
+ goto out_put;
+ }
+
if (!ovl_redirect_follow(ofs))
d.last = i == ovl_numlower(poe) - 1;
else if (d.is_dir || !ofs->numdatalayer)
--
2.33.8
On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 3:17 PM Vasiliy Kovalev <kovalev@altlinux.org> wrote:
>
> Ensure that the lookup operation is present for the inode in the overlay
> filesystem. If the operation is missing, log a warning and return an EIO
> error to prevent further issues in the lookup process.
>
> Reported-by: syzbot+a8c9d476508bd14a90e5@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> Link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=a8c9d476508bd14a90e5
> Signed-off-by: Vasiliy Kovalev <kovalev@altlinux.org>
> ---
> fs/overlayfs/namei.c | 7 +++++++
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/namei.c b/fs/overlayfs/namei.c
> index 5764f91d283e7..a73f37e401cf0 100644
> --- a/fs/overlayfs/namei.c
> +++ b/fs/overlayfs/namei.c
> @@ -1115,6 +1115,13 @@ struct dentry *ovl_lookup(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
> for (i = 0; !d.stop && i < ovl_numlower(poe); i++) {
> struct ovl_path lower = ovl_lowerstack(poe)[i];
>
> + if (!lower.dentry->d_inode->i_op->lookup) {
> + err = -EIO;
> + pr_warn_ratelimited("missing lookup operation for inode %p\n",
> + lower.dentry->d_inode);
> + goto out_put;
> + }
> +
This looks like it is papering over a bug.
The dentries in the poe lower stack are supposed to be
d_can_lookup(), which means that they should have a ->lookup op.
See in ovl_lookup_single():
if (!d_can_lookup(this)) {
if (d->is_dir || !last_element) {
d->stop = true;
goto put_and_out;
}
Can you analyse what went wrong with the reproducer?
How did we get to a state where lowerstack of parent
has a dentry which is !d_can_lookup?
Thanks,
Amir.
On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 at 19:54, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can you analyse what went wrong with the reproducer?
> How did we get to a state where lowerstack of parent
> has a dentry which is !d_can_lookup?
Theoretically we could still get a an S_ISDIR inode, because
ovl_get_inode() doesn't look at the is_dir value that lookup found.
I.e. lookup thinks it found a non-dir, but iget will create a dir
because of the backing inode's type.
AFAICS this can only happen if i_op->lookup is not set on S_ISDIR for
the backing inode, which shouldn't happen on normal filesystems.
Reproducer seems to use bfs, which *should* be normal, and bfs_iget
certainly doesn't do anything weird in that case, so I still don't
understand what is happening.
In any case something like the following should filter out such weirdness:
bool ovl_dentry_weird(struct dentry *dentry)
{
+ if (!d_can_lookup(dentry) && !d_is_file(dentry) &&
!d_is_symlink(dentry))
+ return true;
+
return dentry->d_flags & (DCACHE_NEED_AUTOMOUNT |
Thanks,
Miklos
Hi,
19.11.2024 12:05, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 at 19:54, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Can you analyse what went wrong with the reproducer?
>> How did we get to a state where lowerstack of parent
>> has a dentry which is !d_can_lookup?
>
> Theoretically we could still get a an S_ISDIR inode, because
> ovl_get_inode() doesn't look at the is_dir value that lookup found.
> I.e. lookup thinks it found a non-dir, but iget will create a dir
> because of the backing inode's type.
>
> AFAICS this can only happen if i_op->lookup is not set on S_ISDIR for
> the backing inode, which shouldn't happen on normal filesystems.
> Reproducer seems to use bfs, which *should* be normal, and bfs_iget
> certainly doesn't do anything weird in that case, so I still don't
> understand what is happening.
During testing, it was discovered that BFS can return a directory inode
without a lookup operation. Adding the following check in bfs_iget:
struct inode *bfs_iget(struct super_block *sb, unsigned long ino)
{
...
brelse(bh);
+ if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode) && !inode->i_op->lookup) {
+ printf("Directory inode missing lookup %s:%08lx\n",
inode->i_sb->s_id, ino);
+ goto error;
+ }
+
unlock_new_inode(inode);
return inode;
error:
iget_failed(inode);
return ERR_PTR(-EIO);
}
prevents the error but exposes an invalid inode:
loop0: detected capacity change from 0 to 64
BFS-fs: bfs_iget(): Directory inode missing lookup loop0:00000002
overlayfs: overlapping lowerdir path
Would this be considered a valid workaround, or does BFS require further
fixes?
> In any case something like the following should filter out such weirdness:
>
> bool ovl_dentry_weird(struct dentry *dentry)
> {
> + if (!d_can_lookup(dentry) && !d_is_file(dentry) &&
> !d_is_symlink(dentry))
> + return true;
> +
> return dentry->d_flags & (DCACHE_NEED_AUTOMOUNT |
I tested this addition successfully.
Additionally, fixes for BFS seem to be discussed reluctantly.
For instance, this patch set [1] has remained unanswered.
Perhaps it would be worth considering discarding invalid inodes at the
overlayfs level?
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240822161219.459054-1-kovalev@altlinux.org/
> Thanks,
> Miklos
--
Thanks,
Vasiliy Kovalev
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 05:33:03PM +0300, Vasiliy Kovalev wrote:
> without a lookup operation. Adding the following check in bfs_iget:
>
> struct inode *bfs_iget(struct super_block *sb, unsigned long ino)
> {
>
> ...
> brelse(bh);
>
> + if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode) && !inode->i_op->lookup) {
> + printf("Directory inode missing lookup %s:%08lx\n",
> inode->i_sb->s_id, ino);
> + goto error;
> + }
> +
> unlock_new_inode(inode);
> return inode;
>
> error:
> iget_failed(inode);
> return ERR_PTR(-EIO);
> }
>
> prevents the error but exposes an invalid inode:
>
> loop0: detected capacity change from 0 to 64
> BFS-fs: bfs_iget(): Directory inode missing lookup loop0:00000002
> overlayfs: overlapping lowerdir path
>
> Would this be considered a valid workaround, or does BFS require further
> fixes?
Yes, it does. Note that this
inode->i_mode = 0x0000FFFF & le32_to_cpu(di->i_mode);
sets the bits 0..15, which includes not only the permissions
(0..11), but the file type as well. And those |= are not
going to be enough to prevent trouble - what we have there
is
0x1000 => FIFO
0x2000 => CHR
0x4000 => DIR
0x6000 => BLK
0x8000 => REG
0xa000 => LNK
0xe000 => SOCK
So depending upon ->i_vtype you get one of
* ->i_op and ->i_fop set for directory, type bits - 0x4000 | junk
* ->i_op and ->i_fop set for regular file, type bits - 0x8000 | junk
* ->i_op and ->i_fop left empty, type bits - junk.
Frankly, I would rather ignore bits 12..15 (i.e.
inode->i_mode = 0x00000FFF & le32_to_cpu(di->i_mode);
instead of
inode->i_mode = 0x0000FFFF & le32_to_cpu(di->i_mode);
) and complain (and fail) if ->i_vtype value is fucked up.
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 3:33 PM Vasiliy Kovalev <kovalev@altlinux.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> 19.11.2024 12:05, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 at 19:54, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Can you analyse what went wrong with the reproducer?
> >> How did we get to a state where lowerstack of parent
> >> has a dentry which is !d_can_lookup?
> >
> > Theoretically we could still get a an S_ISDIR inode, because
> > ovl_get_inode() doesn't look at the is_dir value that lookup found.
> > I.e. lookup thinks it found a non-dir, but iget will create a dir
> > because of the backing inode's type.
> >
> > AFAICS this can only happen if i_op->lookup is not set on S_ISDIR for
> > the backing inode, which shouldn't happen on normal filesystems.
> > Reproducer seems to use bfs, which *should* be normal, and bfs_iget
> > certainly doesn't do anything weird in that case, so I still don't
> > understand what is happening.
>
> During testing, it was discovered that BFS can return a directory inode
> without a lookup operation. Adding the following check in bfs_iget:
>
> struct inode *bfs_iget(struct super_block *sb, unsigned long ino)
> {
>
> ...
> brelse(bh);
>
> + if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode) && !inode->i_op->lookup) {
> + printf("Directory inode missing lookup %s:%08lx\n",
> inode->i_sb->s_id, ino);
> + goto error;
> + }
> +
> unlock_new_inode(inode);
> return inode;
>
> error:
> iget_failed(inode);
> return ERR_PTR(-EIO);
> }
>
> prevents the error but exposes an invalid inode:
>
> loop0: detected capacity change from 0 to 64
> BFS-fs: bfs_iget(): Directory inode missing lookup loop0:00000002
> overlayfs: overlapping lowerdir path
>
> Would this be considered a valid workaround, or does BFS require further
> fixes?
>
> > In any case something like the following should filter out such weirdness:
> >
> > bool ovl_dentry_weird(struct dentry *dentry)
> > {
> > + if (!d_can_lookup(dentry) && !d_is_file(dentry) &&
> > !d_is_symlink(dentry))
> > + return true;
> > +
> > return dentry->d_flags & (DCACHE_NEED_AUTOMOUNT |
>
> I tested this addition successfully.
>
> Additionally, fixes for BFS seem to be discussed reluctantly.
> For instance, this patch set [1] has remained unanswered.
> Perhaps it would be worth considering discarding invalid inodes at the
> overlayfs level?
Sure. please send proper patch following Miklos' suggestion
Thanks,
Amir.
Add a check to the ovl_dentry_weird() function to prevent the
processing of directory inodes that lack the lookup function.
This is important because such inodes can cause errors in overlayfs
when passed to the lowerstack.
Reported-by: syzbot+a8c9d476508bd14a90e5@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=a8c9d476508bd14a90e5
Suggested-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Signed-off-by: Vasiliy Kovalev <kovalev@altlinux.org>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
---
fs/overlayfs/util.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/util.c b/fs/overlayfs/util.c
index 3bb107471fb42..9aa7493b1e103 100644
--- a/fs/overlayfs/util.c
+++ b/fs/overlayfs/util.c
@@ -202,6 +202,9 @@ void ovl_dentry_init_flags(struct dentry *dentry, struct dentry *upperdentry,
bool ovl_dentry_weird(struct dentry *dentry)
{
+ if (!d_can_lookup(dentry) && !d_is_file(dentry) && !d_is_symlink(dentry))
+ return true;
+
return dentry->d_flags & (DCACHE_NEED_AUTOMOUNT |
DCACHE_MANAGE_TRANSIT |
DCACHE_OP_HASH |
--
2.33.8
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 4:58 PM Vasiliy Kovalev <kovalev@altlinux.org> wrote:
>
> Add a check to the ovl_dentry_weird() function to prevent the
> processing of directory inodes that lack the lookup function.
> This is important because such inodes can cause errors in overlayfs
> when passed to the lowerstack.
>
> Reported-by: syzbot+a8c9d476508bd14a90e5@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> Link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=a8c9d476508bd14a90e5
> Suggested-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
> Signed-off-by: Vasiliy Kovalev <kovalev@altlinux.org>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> ---
> fs/overlayfs/util.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/util.c b/fs/overlayfs/util.c
> index 3bb107471fb42..9aa7493b1e103 100644
> --- a/fs/overlayfs/util.c
> +++ b/fs/overlayfs/util.c
> @@ -202,6 +202,9 @@ void ovl_dentry_init_flags(struct dentry *dentry, struct dentry *upperdentry,
>
> bool ovl_dentry_weird(struct dentry *dentry)
> {
> + if (!d_can_lookup(dentry) && !d_is_file(dentry) && !d_is_symlink(dentry))
> + return true;
> +
> return dentry->d_flags & (DCACHE_NEED_AUTOMOUNT |
> DCACHE_MANAGE_TRANSIT |
> DCACHE_OP_HASH |
> --
> 2.33.8
>
Applied to overlayfs-next. Will send along with 6.13 PR
Thanks,
Amir.
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.