On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 12:22:51 -0400 Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 19:30:15 +0400 > Pavel Shilovsky <[email protected]> wrote: > > > move it to the beginning of the loop. > > > > Signed-off-by: Pavel Shilovsky <[email protected]> > > --- > > fs/cifs/cifsfs.c | 10 ++++++---- > > 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/cifs/cifsfs.c b/fs/cifs/cifsfs.c > > index 0435bb9..8b79122 100644 > > --- a/fs/cifs/cifsfs.c > > +++ b/fs/cifs/cifsfs.c > > @@ -559,6 +559,12 @@ cifs_get_root(struct smb_vol *vol, struct super_block > > *sb) > > struct inode *dir = dentry->d_inode; > > struct dentry *child; > > > > + if (!dir) { > > + dput(dentry); > > + dentry = ERR_PTR(-ENOENT); > > + break; > > + } > > + > > /* skip separators */ > > while (*s == sep) > > s++; > > @@ -574,10 +580,6 @@ cifs_get_root(struct smb_vol *vol, struct super_block > > *sb) > > mutex_unlock(&dir->i_mutex); > > dput(dentry); > > dentry = child; > > - if (!dentry->d_inode) { > > - dput(dentry); > > - dentry = ERR_PTR(-ENOENT); > > - } > > } while (!IS_ERR(dentry)); > > _FreeXid(xid); > > kfree(full_path); > > What exactly does this fix? The only possible thing I could see it is > if sb->s_root was a negative dentry, and I'm not sure that would ever > happen. Would it? > Ahh, nevermind. I see the issue... If IS_ERR(dentry) is true then we definitely don't want to try and dereference the inode. This needs to go into 3.1 and stable as well. Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <[email protected]> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
