[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140313042934.GM18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 04:29:34 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...il.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: fix i_writecount on shmem and friends
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 03:08:00PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> + inode = mddev->bitmap_info.file->f_mapping->host;
> + if (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode)) {
> + printk(KERN_ERR "%s: error: bitmap file must be a regular file\n",
> + mdname(mddev));
> + fput(mddev->bitmap_info.file);
> + mddev->bitmap_info.file = NULL;
> + return -EBADF;
> + }
> + if (atomic_read(&inode->i_writecount) != 1) {
Umm... I think you ought to check more than that. At the very least you
want to check that you have it opened for write - you don't want e.g.
a filesystem containing that puppy remounted r/o under you. Another thing
is, what happens if it's not a buffer cache backed one? Hell, what happens
if it's a file on NFS? You are relying on bmap() working, right? So it
looks like you ought to check if ->bmap() is there. And I really wonder
how well does it play with journalling fs...
--
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