linux-kernel - Re: Regression caused by using node_to

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 13 Apr 2015 15:44:05 +0300
From:	Boaz Harrosh <boaz@...xistor.com>
To:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
CC:	Zhao Lei <zhaolei@...fujitsu.com>,
	'Christoph Hellwig' <hch@....de>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, 'Jens Axboe' <axboe@...com>,
	'LKML' <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Regression caused by using node_to_bdi()

On 04/13/2015 03:21 PM, Jan Kara wrote:
<>
>> -struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode);
>> +struct backing_dev_info *__inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode);
>> +
>> +static inline
>> +struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode)
>> +{
>> +	if (!inode || !inode->i_sb)
>> +		return __inode_to_bdi(inode);
>> +
>> +	return inode->i_sb->s_bdi;
>> +}
>   This is wrong for block-device inodes, isn't it?

Rrr yes my bad I meant

+struct backing_dev_info *inode_to_bdi(struct inode *inode)
+{
+	if (!inode || !inode->i_sb || !inode->i_sb->s_bdi)
+		return __inode_to_bdi(inode);
+
+	return inode->i_sb->s_bdi;
+}

I was hopping that blockdev_superblock->s_bdi == NULL
because what sb_is_blkdev_sb() is doing is checking
for blockdev_superblock.

>From code audit I do not see where it might be set but
I might have missed it.

Thanks Jan
Boaz

> 
> 							Honza
> 

--
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/