In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ext4: fix bug on in ext4_es_cache_extent as ext4_split_extent_at failed We got follow bug_on when run fsstress with injecting IO fault: [130747.323114] kernel BUG at fs/ext4/extents_status.c:762! [130747.323117] Internal error: Oops - BUG: 0 [#1] SMP ...... [130747.334329] Call trace: [130747.334553] ext4_es_cache_extent+0x150/0x168 [ext4] [130747.334975] ext4_cache_extents+0x64/0xe8 [ext4] [130747.335368] ext4_find_extent+0x300/0x330 [ext4] [130747.335759] ext4_ext_map_blocks+0x74/0x1178 [ext4] [130747.336179] ext4_map_blocks+0x2f4/0x5f0 [ext4] [130747.336567] ext4_mpage_readpages+0x4a8/0x7a8 [ext4] [130747.336995] ext4_readpage+0x54/0x100 [ext4] [130747.337359] generic_file_buffered_read+0x410/0xae8 [130747.337767] generic_file_read_iter+0x114/0x190 [130747.338152] ext4_file_read_iter+0x5c/0x140 [ext4] [130747.338556] __vfs_read+0x11c/0x188 [130747.338851] vfs_read+0x94/0x150 [130747.339110] ksys_read+0x74/0xf0 This patch's modification is according to Jan Kara's suggestion in: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linux-ext4/patch/20210428085158.3728201-1-yebin10@huawei.com/ "I see. Now I understand your patch. Honestly, seeing how fragile is trying to fix extent tree after split has failed in the middle, I would probably go even further and make sure we fix the tree properly in case of ENOSPC and EDQUOT (those are easily user triggerable). Anything else indicates a HW problem or fs corruption so I'd rather leave the extent tree as is and don't try to fix it (which also means we will not create overlapping extents)."
With Rapid7 live dashboards, I have a clear view of all the assets on my network, which ones can be exploited, and what I need to do in order to reduce the risk in my environment in real-time. No other tool gives us that kind of value and insight.
– Scott Cheney, Manager of Information Security, Sierra View Medical Center