[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20201015115550.485235-1-colin.king@canonical.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 12:55:50 +0100
From: Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com>
To: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, io-uring@...r.kernel.org
Cc: kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH][next] io_uring: fix flags check for the REQ_F_WORK_INITIALIZED setting
From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
Currently the check for REQ_F_WORK_INITIALIZED is always true because
the | operator is being used. I believe this check should be checking
if the bit is set using the & operator.
Addresses-Coverity: ("Wrong operator used")
Fixes: 9c357fed168a ("io_uring: fix REQ_F_COMP_LOCKED by killing it")
Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
---
fs/io_uring.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
index 01d0b35415dc..5ef54df03d7c 100644
--- a/fs/io_uring.c
+++ b/fs/io_uring.c
@@ -1813,7 +1813,7 @@ static void __io_fail_links(struct io_kiocb *req)
* but avoid REQ_F_WORK_INITIALIZED because it may deadlock on
* work.fs->lock.
*/
- if (link->flags | REQ_F_WORK_INITIALIZED)
+ if (link->flags & REQ_F_WORK_INITIALIZED)
io_put_req_deferred(link, 2);
else
io_double_put_req(link);
--
2.27.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists