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: Mon, 9 Jul 2018 05:53:54 +0100 From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: [RFC][PATCH 04/27] make sure do_dentry_open() won't return positive as an error From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> An ->open() instances really, really should not be doing that. There's a lot of places e.g. around atomic_open() that could be confused by that, so let's catch that early. Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> --- fs/open.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/fs/open.c b/fs/open.c index d0e955b558ad..40658ef912d2 100644 --- a/fs/open.c +++ b/fs/open.c @@ -812,6 +812,10 @@ static int do_dentry_open(struct file *f, return 0; cleanup_all: + if (unlikely(error > 0)) { + WARN_ON(1); + error = -EINVAL; + } fops_put(f->f_op); if (f->f_mode & FMODE_WRITER) { put_write_access(inode); -- 2.11.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists