commit 2ebc3464781ad24474abcbd2274e6254689853b5 upstream.

1.  The BTRFS_IOC_CLONE and BTRFS_IOC_CLONE_RANGE ioctls should check
whether the donor file is append-only before writing to it.

2.  The BTRFS_IOC_CLONE_RANGE ioctl appears to have an integer
overflow that allows a user to specify an out-of-bounds range to copy
from the source file (if off + len wraps around).  I haven't been able
to successfully exploit this, but I'd imagine that a clever attacker
could use this to read things he shouldn't.  Even if it's not
exploitable, it couldn't hurt to be safe.

Signed-off-by: Dan Rosenberg <dan.j.rosenberg@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>

commit 2f26afba46f0ebf155cf9be746496a0304a5b7cf upstream.

On btrfs, do the following
------------------
# su user1
# cd btrfs-part/
# touch aaa
# getfacl aaa
  # file: aaa
  # owner: user1
  # group: user1
  user::rw-
  group::rw-
  other::r--
# su user2
# cd btrfs-part/
# setfacl -m u::rwx aaa
# getfacl aaa
  # file: aaa
  # owner: user1
  # group: user1
  user::rwx           <- successed to setfacl
  group::rw-
  other::r--
------------------
but we should prohibit it that user2 changing user1's acl.
In fact, on ext3 and other fs, a message occurs:
  setfacl: aaa: Operation not permitted

This patch fixed it.

Signed-off-by: Shi Weihua <shiwh@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>

* git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable:
  Btrfs: check for read permission on src file in the clone ioctl

The existing code would have allowed you to clone a file that was
only open for writing

Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>

It's now a provided helper, so get rid of the internal setup
and btrfs atomic_t bdi enumerator.

Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>

* 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable:
  Btrfs: make sure the chunk allocator doesn't create zero length chunks
  Btrfs: fix data enospc check overflow

A recent commit allowed for smaller chunks to be created, but didn't
make sure they were always bigger than a stripe.  After some divides,
this led to zero length stripes.

Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>

* git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable:
  Btrfs: add check for changed leaves in setup_leaf_for_split
  Btrfs: create snapshot references in same commit as snapshot
  Btrfs: fix small race with delalloc flushing waitqueue's
  Btrfs: use add_to_page_cache_lru, use __page_cache_alloc
  Btrfs: fix chunk allocate size calculation
  Btrfs: kill max_extent mount option
  Btrfs: fail to mount if we have problems reading the block groups
  Btrfs: check btrfs_get_extent return for IS_ERR()
  Btrfs: handle kmalloc() failure in inode lookup ioctl
  Btrfs: dereferencing freed memory
  Btrfs: Simplify num_stripes's calculation logical for __btrfs_alloc_chunk()
  Btrfs: Add error handle for btrfs_search_slot() in btrfs_read_chunk_tree()
  Btrfs: Remove unnecessary finish_wait() in wait_current_trans()
  Btrfs: add NULL check for do_walk_down()
  Btrfs: remove duplicate include in ioctl.c

Fix trivial conflict in fs/btrfs/compression.c due to slab.h include
cleanups.

Because we account for reserved space we get from the allocator before we
actually account for allocating delalloc space, we can have a small window where
the amount of "used" space in a space_info is more than the total amount of
space in the space_info.  This will cause a overflow in our check, so it will
seem like we have _tons_ of free space, and we'll allow reservations to occur
that will end up larger than the amount of space we have.  I've seen users
report ENOSPC panic's in cow_file_range a few times recently, so I tried to
reproduce this problem and found I could reproduce it if I ran one of my tests
in a loop for like 20 minutes.  With this patch my test ran all night without
issues.  Thanks,

Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>

setup_leaf_for_split needs to drop the path and search again, and has
checks to see if the item we want to split changed size.  But, it misses
the case where the leaf changed and now has enough room for the item
we want to insert.

This adds an extra check to make sure the leaf really needs splitting
before we call btrfs_split_leaf(), which keeps us from trying to split
a leaf with a single item.

btrfs_split_leaf() will blindly split the single item leaf, leaving us
with one good leaf and one empty leaf and then a crash.

Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>