[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1268406591.3156.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 10:09:51 -0500
From: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: ext-jani.1.nikula@...ia.com, bfields@...ldses.org, neilb@...e.de,
davem@...emloft.net, batsakis@...app.com, bhalevy@...asas.com,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sunrpc: fix error path - actually return ERR_PTR() on
error
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 23:14 +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Jani Nikula wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <ext-jani.1.nikula@...ia.com>
> >
> > ---
> >
> > NOTE: I'm afraid I'm unable to test this; please consider this more a
> > bug report than a complete patch.
> > ---
> Indeed, it has to be "return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);".
> Otherwise, it will trigger NULL pointer dereference some lines later.
>
> bc_sock = container_of(args->bc_xprt, struct svc_sock, sk_xprt);
> bc_sock->sk_bc_xprt = xprt;
>
> This bug was introduced by f300baba5a1536070d6d77bf0c8c4ca999bb4f0f
> "nfsd41: sunrpc: add new xprt class for nfsv4.1 backchannel" and
> exists in 2.6.32 and later.
Or it should just be dropped. I don't see any reason why nfsd should be
trying to set up a callback channel if it doesn't already know that it
has a socket. Returning an error value in that case would just be
papering over a design bug.
Trond
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists