Re: One more unlock missing in error case

Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> This patch is needed to in addition to the other unlocking fix which is
>  already applied.  It should be obvious that the system will deadlock in
>  case this isn't done.

hmm.  How's about we undo that goto tangle while we're there?


--- devel/fs/namei.c~nameic-unlock-missing-in-error-case	2006-02-04 15:57:22.000000000 -0800
+++ devel-akpm/fs/namei.c	2006-02-04 16:07:56.000000000 -0800
@@ -1070,6 +1070,8 @@ static int fastcall do_path_lookup(int d
 				unsigned int flags, struct nameidata *nd)
 {
 	int retval = 0;
+	int fput_needed;
+	struct file *file;
 
 	nd->last_type = LAST_ROOT; /* if there are only slashes... */
 	nd->flags = flags;
@@ -1091,29 +1093,22 @@ static int fastcall do_path_lookup(int d
 		nd->mnt = mntget(current->fs->pwdmnt);
 		nd->dentry = dget(current->fs->pwd);
 	} else {
-		struct file *file;
-		int fput_needed;
 		struct dentry *dentry;
 
 		file = fget_light(dfd, &fput_needed);
-		if (!file) {
-			retval = -EBADF;
-			goto out_fail;
-		}
+		retval = -EBADF;
+		if (!file)
+			goto unlock_fail;
 
 		dentry = file->f_dentry;
 
-		if (!S_ISDIR(dentry->d_inode->i_mode)) {
-			retval = -ENOTDIR;
-			fput_light(file, fput_needed);
-			goto out_fail;
-		}
+		retval = -ENOTDIR;
+		if (!S_ISDIR(dentry->d_inode->i_mode))
+			goto fput_unlock_fail;
 
 		retval = file_permission(file, MAY_EXEC);
-		if (retval) {
-			fput_light(file, fput_needed);
-			goto out_fail;
-		}
+		if (retval)
+			goto fput_unlock_fail;
 
 		nd->mnt = mntget(file->f_vfsmnt);
 		nd->dentry = dget(dentry);
@@ -1127,7 +1122,12 @@ out:
 	if (unlikely(current->audit_context
 		     && nd && nd->dentry && nd->dentry->d_inode))
 		audit_inode(name, nd->dentry->d_inode, flags);
-out_fail:
+	return retval;
+
+fput_unlock_fail:
+	fput_light(file, fput_needed);
+unlock_fail:
+	read_unlock(&current->fs->lock);
 	return retval;
 }
 
_

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: One more unlock missing in error case
    • From: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>
  • Re: One more unlock missing in error case
    • From: Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>

• References:
  • One more unlock missing in error case
    • From: Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [CFT] Don't use ASYNC_* nor SERIAL_IO_* with serial_core
• Next by Date: Re: Check for references to discarded sections during build time
• Previous by thread: One more unlock missing in error case
• Next by thread: Re: One more unlock missing in error case
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]