[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190712043341.GI17978@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 05:33:42 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>,
Chanho Min <chanho.min@....com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Aleksa Sarai <asarai@...e.de>,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 05/10] namei: O_BENEATH-style path resolution flags
On Sun, Jul 07, 2019 at 12:57:32AM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
> @@ -1442,8 +1464,11 @@ static int follow_dotdot_rcu(struct nameidata *nd)
> struct inode *inode = nd->inode;
>
> while (1) {
> - if (path_equal(&nd->path, &nd->root))
> + if (path_equal(&nd->path, &nd->root)) {
> + if (unlikely(nd->flags & LOOKUP_BENEATH))
> + return -EXDEV;
> @@ -1468,6 +1493,8 @@ static int follow_dotdot_rcu(struct nameidata *nd)
> return -ECHILD;
> if (&mparent->mnt == nd->path.mnt)
> break;
> + if (unlikely(nd->flags & LOOKUP_XDEV))
> + return -EXDEV;
> /* we know that mountpoint was pinned */
> nd->path.dentry = mountpoint;
> nd->path.mnt = &mparent->mnt;
> @@ -1482,6 +1509,8 @@ static int follow_dotdot_rcu(struct nameidata *nd)
> return -ECHILD;
> if (!mounted)
> break;
> + if (unlikely(nd->flags & LOOKUP_XDEV))
> + return -EXDEV;
Are you sure these failure exits in follow_dotdot_rcu() won't give
suprious hard errors?
> + if (unlikely(nd->flags & LOOKUP_BENEATH)) {
> + error = dirfd_path_init(nd);
> + if (unlikely(error))
> + return ERR_PTR(error);
> + nd->root = nd->path;
> + if (!(nd->flags & LOOKUP_RCU))
> + path_get(&nd->root);
> + }
> if (*s == '/') {
> if (likely(!nd->root.mnt))
> set_root(nd);
> @@ -2350,9 +2400,11 @@ static const char *path_init(struct nameidata *nd, unsigned flags)
> s = ERR_PTR(error);
> return s;
> }
> - error = dirfd_path_init(nd);
> - if (unlikely(error))
> - return ERR_PTR(error);
> + if (likely(!nd->path.mnt)) {
Is that a weird way of saying "if we hadn't already called dirfd_path_init()"?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists