[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151210004851.GB20997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 00:48:51 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mike Marshall <hubcap@...ibond.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the vfs tree
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 11:23:22AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> [Just adding the origefs maintainer to the cc list]
> > -static const char *pvfs2_follow_link(struct dentry *dentry, void **cookie)
> > +static const char *pvfs2_get_link(struct dentry *dentry, struct inode *inode,
> > + void **cookie)
> > {
> > - char *target = PVFS2_I(dentry->d_inode)->link_target;
Better fix is to have inode->link = PVFS2_I(dentry->d_inode)->link_target;
when we set the latter and use .get_link = simple_get_link...
Said that, there is an unpleasant bug in that area - link_target of a live
inode can be overwritten, right under the pathname resolution walking the
old contents of that thing.
copy_attributes_to_inode() is triggered by ->d_revalidate() and by ->getattr()
and it's really, really unsafe for a live inode. Just look what it does
to ->i_mode... Sure, normally a server won't return different symlink bodies
on subsequent getattr requests. As long as it's sane (and not compromised,
etc.), but relying upon that is not a good idea.
--
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