From 6c37157874aa2b153b722868bd984002fbcff6bb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jan Kara Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 18:05:03 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] udf: Fix lost indirect extent block When inode ends with empty indirect extent block and we extended that file, udf_do_extend_file() ended up just overwriting pointer to it with another extent and thus effectively leaking the block and also corruptiong length of allocation descriptors. Fix the problem by properly following into next indirect extent when it is present. Signed-off-by: Jan Kara --- fs/udf/inode.c | 11 ++++++++++- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/udf/inode.c b/fs/udf/inode.c index 34c2d2b79594..846294891925 100644 --- a/fs/udf/inode.c +++ b/fs/udf/inode.c @@ -539,9 +539,18 @@ static int udf_do_extend_file(struct inode *inode, udf_add_aext(inode, last_pos, &last_ext->extLocation, last_ext->extLength, 1); count++; - } else + } else { + struct kernel_lb_addr tmploc; + uint32_t tmplen; + udf_write_aext(inode, last_pos, &last_ext->extLocation, last_ext->extLength, 1); + /* + * We've rewritten the last extent but there may be empty + * indirect extent after it - enter it. + */ + udf_next_aext(inode, last_pos, &tmploc, &tmplen, 0); + } /* Managed to do everything necessary? */ if (!blocks) -- 2.39.5