[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241124183743.GX3387508@ZenIV>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:37:43 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 21/26] smb: avoid pointless cred reference count bump
On Sun, Nov 24, 2024 at 02:44:07PM +0100, Christian Brauner wrote:
> No need for the extra reference count bump.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
> ---
> fs/smb/server/smb_common.c | 4 +---
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/smb/server/smb_common.c b/fs/smb/server/smb_common.c
> index f1d770a214c8b2c7d7dd4083ef57c7130bbce52c..a3f96804f84f03c22376769dffdf60cd66f5e3d2 100644
> --- a/fs/smb/server/smb_common.c
> +++ b/fs/smb/server/smb_common.c
> @@ -780,7 +780,7 @@ int __ksmbd_override_fsids(struct ksmbd_work *work,
> cred->cap_effective = cap_drop_fs_set(cred->cap_effective);
>
> WARN_ON(work->saved_cred);
> - work->saved_cred = override_creds(get_new_cred(cred));
> + work->saved_cred = override_creds(cred);
> if (!work->saved_cred) {
> abort_creds(cred);
> return -EINVAL;
Won't that leave a dangling pointer?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists