| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 20:18:49 -0400 From: Chengyu Song <csong84@...ech.edu> To: sfrench@...ba.org, linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org, samba-technical@...ts.samba.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Cc: taesoo@...ech.edu, changwoo@...ech.edu, sanidhya@...ech.edu, blee@...ech.edu, csong84@...ech.edu Subject: [PATCH 1/1] cifs: potential missing check for posix_lock_file_wait posix_lock_file_wait may fail under certain circumstances, and its result is usually checked/returned. But given the complexity of cifs, I'm not sure if the result is intentially left unchecked and always expected to succeed. Signed-off-by: Chengyu Song <csong84@...ech.edu> --- fs/cifs/file.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/cifs/file.c b/fs/cifs/file.c index a94b3e6..beef67b 100644 --- a/fs/cifs/file.c +++ b/fs/cifs/file.c @@ -1553,8 +1553,8 @@ cifs_setlk(struct file *file, struct file_lock *flock, __u32 type, rc = server->ops->mand_unlock_range(cfile, flock, xid); out: - if (flock->fl_flags & FL_POSIX) - posix_lock_file_wait(file, flock); + if (flock->fl_flags & FL_POSIX && !rc) + rc = posix_lock_file_wait(file, flock); return rc; } -- 2.1.0 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists