[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1220382298.14226.4.camel@blender>
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 13:04:58 -0600
From: Abhishek Kulkarni <kulkarni@...l.gov>
To: Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@...il.com>
Cc: v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 9p bug fix: return non-zero error value in p9_put_data
Resubmitting my previous 9p bug fix patch that removes the bogus return
value in p9_put_data which made every p9_client_write fail.
Signed-off-by: Abhishek Kulkarni <kulkarni@...l.gov>
---
net/9p/conv.c | 12 +++---------
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/9p/conv.c b/net/9p/conv.c
index 4454720..08ec35a 100644
--- a/net/9p/conv.c
+++ b/net/9p/conv.c
@@ -446,13 +446,12 @@ p9_put_str(struct cbuf *bufp, char *data, struct
p9_str *str)
}
}
-static int
+static void
p9_put_data(struct cbuf *bufp, const char *data, int count,
unsigned char **pdata)
{
*pdata = buf_alloc(bufp, count);
memmove(*pdata, data, count);
- return count;
}
static int
@@ -851,7 +850,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(p9_create_tread);
struct p9_fcall *p9_create_twrite(u32 fid, u64 offset, u32 count,
const char *data)
{
- int size, err;
+ int size;
struct p9_fcall *fc;
struct cbuf buffer;
struct cbuf *bufp = &buffer;
@@ -865,12 +864,7 @@ struct p9_fcall *p9_create_twrite(u32 fid, u64
offset, u32 count,
p9_put_int32(bufp, fid, &fc->params.twrite.fid);
p9_put_int64(bufp, offset, &fc->params.twrite.offset);
p9_put_int32(bufp, count, &fc->params.twrite.count);
- err = p9_put_data(bufp, data, count, &fc->params.twrite.data);
- if (err) {
- kfree(fc);
- fc = ERR_PTR(err);
- goto error;
- }
+ p9_put_data(bufp, data, count, &fc->params.twrite.data);
if (buf_check_overflow(bufp)) {
kfree(fc);
--
1.5.4.3
On Thu, 2008-08-28 at 12:35 -0600, Abhishek Kulkarni wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-08-28 at 11:10 -0700, Eric Van Hensbergen wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 10:30 AM, Abhishek Kulkarni <kulkarni@...l.gov> wrote:
> > > p9_put_data is called by p9_create_twrite which expects it to return a
> > > non-zero value on error. This was the reason why every p9_client_write
> > > was failing. This patch also adds a check for buffer overflow in
> > > p9_put_data.
> > >
> >
> > I'm a bit confused about when this is even getting called -- O thought
> > all writes were following the p9_client_uwrite path?
>
> Yes, this bug didn't come up to the surface since p9_create_twrite is
> not even being called anywhere in v9fs. I tripped over it when using 9p
> for a different module that I am working on.
>
> >
> > Also, we do the bufoverflow check in p9_create_write -- so with your
> > patch aren't we doing this twice?
> >
> Yes, but then that makes the "check for error in return value" in
> p9_create_twrite useless since memmove is not going to return an error
> in any case.
>
> Going with the existing convention however, I think the bufoverflow
> check is unnecessary in p9_put_data and so is the check for error on
> return.
>
> I'll resubmit a patch.
>
> -- Abhishek
>
>
> > -eric
> >
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Abhishek Kulkarni <kulkarni@...l.gov>
> > > ---
> > > net/9p/conv.c | 5 ++++-
> > > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > > diff --git a/net/9p/conv.c b/net/9p/conv.c
> > > index 4454720..7f6db15 100644
> > > --- a/net/9p/conv.c
> > > +++ b/net/9p/conv.c
> > > @@ -451,8 +451,11 @@ p9_put_data(struct cbuf *bufp, const char *data,
> > > int count,
> > > unsigned char **pdata)
> > > {
> > > *pdata = buf_alloc(bufp, count);
> > > + if (buf_check_overflow(bufp))
> > > + return -EIO;
> > > +
> > > memmove(*pdata, data, count);
> > > - return count;
> > > + return 0;
> > > }
> > >
> > > static int
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > -- Abhishek
> > >
> > >
--
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