linux-kernel - Re: get_sb_single() - do not pass options twice

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:	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 10:48:34 +0100
From:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>
CC:	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	greg@...ah.com
Subject: Re: get_sb_single() - do not pass options twice

On Sat, 12 Dec 2009, Kay Sievers wrote:
> Ping! Can someone please have a look and comment on that?
> Something like this will now be needed for 2.6.33 to silent a warning.
> 
> Thanks,
> Kay
> 
> > Cc: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>
> > ---
> >  fs/super.c |    2 ++
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > --- a/fs/super.c
> > +++ b/fs/super.c
> > @@ -900,6 +900,8 @@ int get_sb_single(struct file_system_typ
> >                        deactivate_locked_super(s);
> >                        return error;
> >                }
> > +               /* options usually get mangled and can only be parsed once */
> > +               data = NULL;
> >                s->s_flags |= MS_ACTIVE;
> >        }
> >        do_remount_sb(s, flags, data, 0);

I think the do_remount_sb() is a NOP in that case.  So shouldn't it
rather be

	} else {
		do_remount_sb(s, flags, data, 0);
	}

?

Thanks,
Miklos
--
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/