[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20240911182853.19634-1-adiupina@astralinux.ru>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2024 21:28:53 +0300
From: Alexandra Diupina <adiupina@...ralinux.ru>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Alexandra Diupina <adiupina@...ralinux.ru>,
Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@...istor.com>,
linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
lvc-project@...uxtesting.org
Subject: [PATCH] afs: Fix checking wait_event_interruptible() return value
The if-block in question is presumably supposed to handle
wait_event_interruptible() failure, i.e. when it returns -ERESTARTSYS
due to signal received by the task instead of a zero value.
Fix the condition appropriately.
Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with SVACE.
Fixes: 4be5975aea15 ("afs: Further fix file locking")
Signed-off-by: Alexandra Diupina <adiupina@...ralinux.ru>
---
fs/afs/flock.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/afs/flock.c b/fs/afs/flock.c
index f0e96a35093f..2dba323b3395 100644
--- a/fs/afs/flock.c
+++ b/fs/afs/flock.c
@@ -652,7 +652,7 @@ static int afs_do_setlk(struct file *file, struct file_lock *fl)
fl->fl_u.afs.state = AFS_LOCK_PENDING;
goto try_to_lock;
case AFS_LOCK_PENDING:
- if (ret > 0) {
+ if (ret < 0) {
/* We need to retry the lock. We may not be
* notified by the server if it just expired
* rather than being released.
--
2.30.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists