On Wed, 12 Feb 2025, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 03:16:08AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 02:36:48PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> > > @@ -1690,6 +1692,15 @@ struct dentry *lookup_one_qstr_excl(const struct 
> > > qstr *name,
> > >           dput(dentry);
> > >           dentry = old;
> > >   }
> > > +found:
> > 
> > ... and if ->lookup() returns an error, this will blow up (as bot has just
> > reported).

Yes, I need an early exit if (IS_ERR(dentry)).  Thanks.

> > 
> > > + if (d_is_negative(dentry) && !(flags & LOOKUP_CREATE)) {
> > > +         dput(dentry);
> > > +         return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT);
> > > + }
> > > + if (d_is_positive(dentry) && (flags & LOOKUP_EXCL)) {
> > > +         dput(dentry);
> > > +         return ERR_PTR(-EEXIST);
> > > + }
> > 
> > 
> > > @@ -4077,27 +4084,13 @@ static struct dentry *filename_create(int dfd, 
> > > struct filename *name,
> > >    * '/', and a directory wasn't requested.
> > >    */
> > >   if (last.name[last.len] && !want_dir)
> > > -         create_flags = 0;
> > > +         create_flags &= ~LOOKUP_CREATE;
> > 
> > See the patch I've posted in earlier thread; the entire "strip 
> > LOOKUP_CREATE"
> > thing is wrong.
> 
> On top of mainline that's
> 
> filename_create(): don't force handling trailing slashes into the common path
> 
> Only mkdir accepts pathnames that end with / - anything like mknod() 
> (symlink(),
> etc.) always fails on those.  Don't try to force that the common codepath -
> all we are doing is a lookup and check for existence to determine which
> error should it be.  Do that before bothering with mnt_want_write(), etc.;
> as far as underlying filesystem is concerned it's just a lookup.  Simplifies
> the normal codepath and kills the lookup intent dependency on more than
> the call site.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <[email protected]>
> ---
> diff --git a/fs/namei.c b/fs/namei.c
> index 3ab9440c5b93..6189e54f767a 100644
> --- a/fs/namei.c
> +++ b/fs/namei.c
> @@ -4054,13 +4054,13 @@ static struct dentry *filename_create(int dfd, struct 
> filename *name,
>       struct dentry *dentry = ERR_PTR(-EEXIST);
>       struct qstr last;
>       bool want_dir = lookup_flags & LOOKUP_DIRECTORY;
> -     unsigned int reval_flag = lookup_flags & LOOKUP_REVAL;
> -     unsigned int create_flags = LOOKUP_CREATE | LOOKUP_EXCL;
>       int type;
>       int err2;
>       int error;
>  
> -     error = filename_parentat(dfd, name, reval_flag, path, &last, &type);
> +     lookup_flags &= LOOKUP_REVAL;
> +
> +     error = filename_parentat(dfd, name, lookup_flags, path, &last, &type);
>       if (error)
>               return ERR_PTR(error);
>  
> @@ -4070,18 +4070,28 @@ static struct dentry *filename_create(int dfd, struct 
> filename *name,
>        */
>       if (unlikely(type != LAST_NORM))
>               goto out;
> +     /*
> +      * mkdir foo/bar/ is OK, but for anything else a slash in the end
> +      * is always an error; the only question is which one.
> +      */
> +     if (unlikely(last.name[last.len] && !want_dir)) {
> +             dentry = lookup_dcache(&last, path->dentry, lookup_flags);
> +             if (!dentry)
> +                     dentry = lookup_slow(&last, path->dentry, lookup_flags);

I do see some value in the simplicity of this approach, though maybe not
as much value as you see.  But the above uses inode_lock_share(), rather
than the nested version, so lockdep will complain.
If you open-code a nested lock, or write a new helper, you get very
close to the sequence for calling lookup_one_qstr_excl() below.  So
it isn't clear to me that the benefit is worth the cost.

This current code in filename_create isn't actually wrong is it?

Thanks,
NeilBrown



> +             if (!IS_ERR(dentry)) {
> +                     error = d_is_positive(dentry) ? -EEXIST : -ENOENT;
> +                     dput(dentry);
> +                     dentry = ERR_PTR(error);
> +             }
> +             goto out;
> +     }
>  
>       /* don't fail immediately if it's r/o, at least try to report other 
> errors */
>       err2 = mnt_want_write(path->mnt);
> -     /*
> -      * Do the final lookup.  Suppress 'create' if there is a trailing
> -      * '/', and a directory wasn't requested.
> -      */
> -     if (last.name[last.len] && !want_dir)
> -             create_flags = 0;
> +     /* do the final lookup */
>       inode_lock_nested(path->dentry->d_inode, I_MUTEX_PARENT);
>       dentry = lookup_one_qstr_excl(&last, path->dentry,
> -                                   reval_flag | create_flags);
> +                             lookup_flags | LOOKUP_CREATE | LOOKUP_EXCL);
>       if (IS_ERR(dentry))
>               goto unlock;
>  
> @@ -4089,16 +4099,6 @@ static struct dentry *filename_create(int dfd, struct 
> filename *name,
>       if (d_is_positive(dentry))
>               goto fail;
>  
> -     /*
> -      * Special case - lookup gave negative, but... we had foo/bar/
> -      * From the vfs_mknod() POV we just have a negative dentry -
> -      * all is fine. Let's be bastards - you had / on the end, you've
> -      * been asking for (non-existent) directory. -ENOENT for you.
> -      */
> -     if (unlikely(!create_flags)) {
> -             error = -ENOENT;
> -             goto fail;
> -     }
>       if (unlikely(err2)) {
>               error = err2;
>               goto fail;
> 


Reply via email to