[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-block] [PATCH for-2.12 v4] iotests: Test abnormally large size

From: Max Reitz
Subject: Re: [Qemu-block] [PATCH for-2.12 v4] iotests: Test abnormally large size in compressed cluster descriptor
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 16:23:46 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0

On 2018-03-29 11:39, Alberto Garcia wrote:
> On Wed 28 Mar 2018 07:34:15 PM CEST, Max Reitz wrote:
>>> diff --git a/tests/qemu-iotests/122 b/tests/qemu-iotests/122
>>> index 45b359c2ba..5b9593016c 100755
>>> --- a/tests/qemu-iotests/122
>>> +++ b/tests/qemu-iotests/122
>> Not sure if 122 is the right file for this...
>> Or, let me rephrase, it does look to me like it is not the right file.
>> But on the other hand, I don't see a more suitable file.
> Yeah I was tempted to create a new one, but in the end I decided to put
> it there. We can still create a new one if you feel strongly about it.
>>>  echo
>>> +echo "=== Corrupted size field in compressed cluster descriptor ==="
>>> +echo
>>> +# Create an empty image, fill half of it with data and compress it.
>>> +# The L2 entries of the two compressed clusters are located at
>>> +# 0x800000 and 0x800008, their original values are 0x4008000000a00000
>>> +# and 0x4008000000a00802 (5 sectors for compressed data each).
>>> +TEST_IMG="$TEST_IMG".1 _make_test_img 8M
>>> +$QEMU_IO -c "write -P 0x11 0 4M" "$TEST_IMG".1 2>&1 | _filter_qemu_io | 
>>> _filter_testdir
>>> +$QEMU_IMG convert -c -O qcow2 -o cluster_size=2M "$TEST_IMG".1 "$TEST_IMG"
>> Why not just use "write -c" and drop the convert?  (You'd have to use
>> two writes, though, one for each cluster.)
> Yeah, it's also possible, you have to do it in the same qemu-io command
> though, else it will allocate two host clusters. But yes, I can change
> that.
>>> +# Reduce size of compressed data to 4 sectors: this corrupts the image.
>>> +poke_file "$TEST_IMG" $((0x800000)) "\x40\x06"
>>> +$QEMU_IO -c "read  -P 0x11 0 4M" "$TEST_IMG" 2>&1 | _filter_qemu_io | 
>>> _filter_testdir
>>> +
>>> +# 'qemu-img check' however doesn't see anything wrong because it
>>> +# doesn't try to decompress the data and the refcounts are consistent.
>>> +# TODO: update qemu-img so this can be detected
>>> +_check_test_img
>>> +
>>> +# Increase size of compressed data to the maximum (8192 sectors).
>>> +# This makes QEMU read more data (8192 sectors instead of 5, host
>>> +# addresses [0xa00000, 0xdfffff]), but the decompression algorithm
>>> +# stops once we have enough to restore the uncompressed cluster, so
>>> +# the rest of the data is ignored.
>>> +poke_file "$TEST_IMG" $((0x800000)) "\x7f\xfe"
>>> +# Do it also for the second compressed cluster (L2 entry at 0x800008).
>>> +# In this case the compressed data would span 3 host clusters
>>> +# (host addresses: [0xa00802, 0xe00801])
>>> +poke_file "$TEST_IMG" $((0x800008)) "\x7f\xfe"
>>> +
>>> +# Here the image is too small so we're asking QEMU to read beyond the
>>> +# end of the image.
>>> +$QEMU_IO -c "read  -P 0x11  0 4M" "$TEST_IMG" 2>&1 | _filter_qemu_io | 
>>> _filter_testdir
>>> +# But if we grow the image we won't be reading beyond its end anymore.
>>> +$QEMU_IO -c "write -P 0x22 4M 4M" "$TEST_IMG" 2>&1 | _filter_qemu_io | 
>>> _filter_testdir
>>> +$QEMU_IO -c "read  -P 0x11  0 4M" "$TEST_IMG" 2>&1 | _filter_qemu_io | 
>>> _filter_testdir
>> Both reads result in exactly the same output, though, so it doesn't
>> seem like qemu cares.
>> (This is the reason I'm not merging this patch now, because that looks
>> a bit fishy.)
> In this example the size stored on the compressed cluster descriptor is
> corrupted and larger than the size of the compressed data on disk.
> In the first read the image is too small so this makes QEMU read not
> only past the end of the compressed data, but also past the end of the
> qcow2 image itself.
> In the second read the qcow2 image is larger so QEMU reads actual data
> from the subsequent clusters.
> It doesn't make much difference. In the first case the buffer is padded
> with zeroes and in the second with data from other clusters, but QEMU
> only uses the data needed to restore the original uncompressed cluster
> and the rest is ignored. But I thought I could still test both cases,
> that's why there's two reads.

Ah, OK.  I would have preferred a comment then so that people know it's
just expected to work.

>>> +# The refcount data is however wrong because due to the increased size
>>> +# of the compressed data it now reaches the following host clusters.
>>> +# This can be repaired by qemu-img check.
>> The OFLAG_COPIED repair looks a bit interesting, but, er, well.
>> Max
>> (Since a compressed cluster does not correspond 1:1 to a host cluster,
>> you cannot say that a compressed cluster has a refcount -- only host
>> clusters are refcounted.  So what is it supposed to mean that a
>> compressed cluster has a refcount of 1?
> Compressed clusters never have OFLAG_COPIED and we treat it as an error
> if they do (see check_refcounts_l2()),

Interesting.  Wonder why the qcow2 specification doesn't mention that...

>                                        but their host clusters still
> have a reference count.
> A host cluster with 4 compressed clusters has a reference count of 4.
> A compressed cluster that uses two host clusters (even if it's only
> partially) increases the reference count of both of them.
> In this test case the size field of the compressed cluster is too large,
> so it includes uncompressed clusters that are contiguous to it. The
> uncompressed clusters have refcount == 1 and OFLAG_COPIED, but QEMU
> detects that the refcount should be larger and that OFLAG_COPIED should
> not be there, that's why it's repaired.

Aaah, OK, I see.  Thanks for explaining.

> Admittedly the way it's repaired is not the best one: the uncompressed
> clusters have now extra references, but other than that I don't see any
> harmful effect.
> The proper fix for this would be to detect that the compressed cluster
> size is incorrect and correct its value. There's a TODO for that (in the
> first _check_test_img call where it's more severe), but now that I think
> of it I should probably mention that in the second one as well.

Well, the current repair method will at least prevent data loss, so I'm
OK with it.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]