linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next] fs/btrfs: Fix unlocking in btrfs_ref_tree

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAKq8=3KyewqQLdo-GjERuOfKe5ZrmQ+bRPfFRWiyZkjdEVvSeA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 May 2020 17:23:56 +0800
From:   Bo YU <tsu.yubo@...il.com>
To:     Johannes Thumshirn <Johannes.Thumshirn@....com>
Cc:     "clm@...com" <clm@...com>,
        "josef@...icpanda.com" <josef@...icpanda.com>,
        "sterba@...e.com" <sterba@...e.com>,
        "linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] fs/btrfs: Fix unlocking in btrfs_ref_tree_mod

Hi,
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 5:03 PM Johannes Thumshirn
<Johannes.Thumshirn@....com> wrote:
>
> On 15/05/2020 04:17, Bo YU wrote:
> > It adds spin_lock() in add_block_entry() but out path does not unlock
> > it.
>
> Which call path doesn't unlock it? There is an out_unlock label with a
> spin_unlock() right above your insert. So either coverity messed something
> up or the call path that needs the unlock has to jump to out_unlock instead
> of out.
This is out label without unlocking it. It will be offered spin_lock
in add_block_entry()
for be. But here I was worried about that unlock it in if() whether it
is right or not.