| 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: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 00:38:08 +0530
From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: hch@...radead.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, adilger@....com,
corbet@....net, neilb@...e.de, npiggin@...nel.dk,
hooanon05@...oo.co.jp, bfields@...ldses.org, miklos@...redi.hu
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, sfrench@...ibm.com,
philippe.deniel@....FR, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH -V26 05/16] fs: Remove i_nlink check from file system link callback
Now that VFS check for inode->i_nlink == 0 and returns proper
error, remove similar check from file system
Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
fs/btrfs/inode.c | 3 ---
fs/ext3/namei.c | 7 -------
fs/ext4/namei.c | 7 -------
fs/jfs/namei.c | 3 ---
fs/reiserfs/namei.c | 4 ----
fs/ubifs/dir.c | 18 ------------------
6 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
index 160b55b..5b1e504 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
@@ -4794,9 +4794,6 @@ static int btrfs_link(struct dentry *old_dentry, struct inode *dir,
int err;
int drop_inode = 0;
- if (inode->i_nlink == 0)
- return -ENOENT;
-
/* do not allow sys_link's with other subvols of the same device */
if (root->objectid != BTRFS_I(inode)->root->objectid)
return -EPERM;
diff --git a/fs/ext3/namei.c b/fs/ext3/namei.c
index b27ba71..561f692 100644
--- a/fs/ext3/namei.c
+++ b/fs/ext3/namei.c
@@ -2253,13 +2253,6 @@ static int ext3_link (struct dentry * old_dentry,
dquot_initialize(dir);
- /*
- * Return -ENOENT if we've raced with unlink and i_nlink is 0. Doing
- * otherwise has the potential to corrupt the orphan inode list.
- */
- if (inode->i_nlink == 0)
- return -ENOENT;
-
retry:
handle = ext3_journal_start(dir, EXT3_DATA_TRANS_BLOCKS(dir->i_sb) +
EXT3_INDEX_EXTRA_TRANS_BLOCKS);
diff --git a/fs/ext4/namei.c b/fs/ext4/namei.c
index 5485390..e781b7e 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/namei.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/namei.c
@@ -2304,13 +2304,6 @@ static int ext4_link(struct dentry *old_dentry,
dquot_initialize(dir);
- /*
- * Return -ENOENT if we've raced with unlink and i_nlink is 0. Doing
- * otherwise has the potential to corrupt the orphan inode list.
- */
- if (inode->i_nlink == 0)
- return -ENOENT;
-
retry:
handle = ext4_journal_start(dir, EXT4_DATA_TRANS_BLOCKS(dir->i_sb) +
EXT4_INDEX_EXTRA_TRANS_BLOCKS);
diff --git a/fs/jfs/namei.c b/fs/jfs/namei.c
index 81ead85..8799020 100644
--- a/fs/jfs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/jfs/namei.c
@@ -809,9 +809,6 @@ static int jfs_link(struct dentry *old_dentry,
if (ip->i_nlink == JFS_LINK_MAX)
return -EMLINK;
- if (ip->i_nlink == 0)
- return -ENOENT;
-
dquot_initialize(dir);
tid = txBegin(ip->i_sb, 0);
diff --git a/fs/reiserfs/namei.c b/fs/reiserfs/namei.c
index ba5f51e..ae303ca 100644
--- a/fs/reiserfs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/reiserfs/namei.c
@@ -1122,10 +1122,6 @@ static int reiserfs_link(struct dentry *old_dentry, struct inode *dir,
reiserfs_write_unlock(dir->i_sb);
return -EMLINK;
}
- if (inode->i_nlink == 0) {
- reiserfs_write_unlock(dir->i_sb);
- return -ENOENT;
- }
/* inc before scheduling so reiserfs_unlink knows we are here */
inc_nlink(inode);
diff --git a/fs/ubifs/dir.c b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
index 14f64b6..7217d67 100644
--- a/fs/ubifs/dir.c
+++ b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
@@ -522,24 +522,6 @@ static int ubifs_link(struct dentry *old_dentry, struct inode *dir,
ubifs_assert(mutex_is_locked(&dir->i_mutex));
ubifs_assert(mutex_is_locked(&inode->i_mutex));
- /*
- * Return -ENOENT if we've raced with unlink and i_nlink is 0. Doing
- * otherwise has the potential to corrupt the orphan inode list.
- *
- * Indeed, consider a scenario when 'vfs_link(dirA/fileA)' and
- * 'vfs_unlink(dirA/fileA, dirB/fileB)' race. 'vfs_link()' does not
- * lock 'dirA->i_mutex', so this is possible. Both of the functions
- * lock 'fileA->i_mutex' though. Suppose 'vfs_unlink()' wins, and takes
- * 'fileA->i_mutex' mutex first. Suppose 'fileA->i_nlink' is 1. In this
- * case 'ubifs_unlink()' will drop the last reference, and put 'inodeA'
- * to the list of orphans. After this, 'vfs_link()' will link
- * 'dirB/fileB' to 'inodeA'. This is a problem because, for example,
- * the subsequent 'vfs_unlink(dirB/fileB)' will add the same inode
- * to the list of orphans.
- */
- if (inode->i_nlink == 0)
- return -ENOENT;
-
err = dbg_check_synced_i_size(inode);
if (err)
return err;
--
1.7.1
--
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