From 3d916bdaa8eb820b0e65d92362ffaed5be22e5ab Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 14:12:10 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] btrfs: don't BUG_ON on ENOMEM from btrfs_lookup_extent_info()
 in walk_down_proc()

BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2085849

[ Upstream commit a580fb2c3479d993556e1c31b237c9e5be4944a3 ]

We handle errors here properly, ENOMEM isn't fatal, return the error.

Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
CVE-2024-46841
Signed-off-by: Manuel Diewald <manuel.diewald@canonical.com>
Signed-off-by: Roxana Nicolescu <roxana.nicolescu@canonical.com>
---
 fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 1 -
 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
index c405af1e7a2a..d4ff37557324 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
@@ -5359,7 +5359,6 @@ static noinline int walk_down_proc(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
 					       &wc->refs[level],
 					       &wc->flags[level],
 					       NULL);
-		BUG_ON(ret == -ENOMEM);
 		if (ret)
 			return ret;
 		if (unlikely(wc->refs[level] == 0)) {