On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 03:30:50PM -0400, bfields wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 02:56:15PM -0400, Doug Chapman wrote:
> > A recent regression (introduced after 2.6.21) was caught by the LTP test
> > fcntl11. It appears that F_GETLK is not properly checking for existing
> > F_RDLCK and allows taking out a write lock.
>
> Ouch.
>
> > This can be demonstrated by either running fcntl11 from the LTP suite or
> > I have hacked up a much shorter version which demonstrates the issue and
> > am attaching it.
> >
> > Using git bisect I came up with this commit as the one that introduced
> > the issue.
>
> Thanks for the report--investigating....
Argh. Looks like a cut-n-paste error. Does this fix it?
--b.
diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
index 671a034..909f454 100644
--- a/fs/locks.c
+++ b/fs/locks.c
@@ -1632,6 +1632,7 @@ static int posix_lock_to_flock(struct flock *flock, struct file_lock *fl)
flock->l_len = fl->fl_end == OFFSET_MAX ? 0 :
fl->fl_end - fl->fl_start + 1;
flock->l_whence = 0;
+ flock->l_type = fl->fl_type;
return 0;
}
-
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/
[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]
