From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Jul 27 19:38:22 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E19E24C
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 19:38:22 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from david.i.noel@gmail.com)
Received: from mail-wi0-x230.google.com (mail-wi0-x230.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::230])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D69052226
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 19:38:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-wi0-f176.google.com with SMTP id hn3so1193261wib.9
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 12:38:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id
 :subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
 bh=+kuE9z869EE7wneq4wZ354LXgeOFkxzWPFt1EPvA18k=;
 b=uNOH3CD3VGtVKAJL7t0OLbqwe40apeBNPYk5hXek536hcXYOjD0gf+pdS5RdCzo2qG
 7KYR3jlsxhuYX3UWnLiM7vyKTwfIzDWwrvg6CmzH7U1Zei8JyExgm6l5t143i6H4lk/T
 5AkdfxG4P9d5PNU3NHYOKxxYqgZ5UzZMzkuavjWIfelhEcADql0A5/9t+gCRJ32eVFVL
 XQCXuXuP3b4wqWgw9Pq3cdrfqrEpFxsg60H6kPL7MkpE7VQFMb1mWMvx80nrJu6JiJSb
 LsRibWzROGrn38E7L7G8W0ptTE2+OvxZ1uKVVZImzCYj4JkgmRaUeLOsW8rNf+/m0wJi
 MI/g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.77.164 with SMTP id t4mr185261wiw.58.1374953900152; Sat,
 27 Jul 2013 12:38:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.180.138 with HTTP; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 12:38:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <51F420ED.1050402@fjl.co.uk>
References: <CAHAXwYDPMrdY-TP-5T1_6M_ot4gY09jo2_Wi_REOmE=+u+_QuQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGwOe2byRc4LVsyxvTJgxNGCbhvOEaeDXjmFJ7DoXThPQe1bcQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHAXwYCj9AV8ZcDffNNGx-ivL=h_TK9zLQRTPknArX25HSfEag@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGwOe2YCDRqHudovDB_Kz9WHppvB8v2L+0gkDnWgG88bgZTKSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHAXwYCnRDQqgRcvaEE1BmSJYYOidoQzzUoHX_QWdyJzYO3kKw@mail.gmail.com>
 <51F3F290.9020004@cordula.ws>
 <CAHAXwYA7WfYP8OZBVf47xRsDp9N01U3rPLZwwj7PFqkPxm3oag@mail.gmail.com>
 <51F420ED.1050402@fjl.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 14:38:20 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHAXwYArUStyGe600oyiYY3oT0rCwYn-UWqedg8+CHBPq0ZcUA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Delete a directory, crash the system
From: David Noel <david.i.noel@gmail.com>
To: Frank Leonhardt <frank2@fjl.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
Reply-To: David.I.Noel@gmail.com
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 19:38:22 -0000

> I was going to raise an issue when the discussion had died down to a
> concensus. I also don't think it's reasonable for the kernel to bomb
> when it encounters corruption on a disk.
>
> If you want to patch it yourself, edit sys/ufs/ufs/ufs_vnops.c at around
> line 2791 change:
>
>          if (dp->i_effnlink < 3)
>                  panic("ufs_dirrem: Bad link count %d on parent",
>                      dp->i_effnlink);
>
> To
>
>          if (dp->i_effnlink < 3) {
>                  error = EINVAL;
>                  goto out;
>          }
>
> The ufs_link() call has a similar issue.
>
> I can't see why my mod will break anything, but there's always
> unintended consequences. By returning invalid argument, any code above
> it should already be handling that condition although the user will be
> scratching their head wondering what's wrong with it. Returning ENOENT
> or EACCES or ENOTDIR may be better ("No such directory", "Access denied"
> or "Not a valid directory").
>
> The trouble is that it's tricky to test properly without finding a good
> way to corrupt the link count :-)
>
> Regards, Frank.

Cool. Thanks for the patch!