linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ramfs: skip mknod if inode already exists.【请注意，邮件由viro@....linux.org.uk代发】

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 17 Jun 2021 09:13:52 +0800
From:   Chen Li <chenli@...ontech.com>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ramfs: skip mknod if inode already exists.【请注意，邮件由viro@....linux.org.uk代发】

On Wed, 16 Jun 2021 20:16:58 +0800,
Al Viro wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 10:53:12AM +0800, Chen Li wrote:
> > 
> > It's possible we try to mknod a dentry, which have
> > already bound to an inode, just skip it.
> 
> Caller should have checked may_create(), which includes EEXIST handling.
> NAKed-by: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>

Don't know may_create before, thanks!
> 
> Incidentally, if it ever had been called that way, your variant would
> leak inode.  Not the main problem, though...
> 
>