From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@redhat.com>
Subject: [patch][regression after 3.1] minixfs: misplaced checks lead to dentry leak
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 10:51:03 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120104105103.GE23916@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
bitmap size sanity checks should be done *before* allocating ->s_root;
there their cleanup on failure would be correct. As it is, we do iput()
on root inode, but leak the root dentry...
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
I realize that we are *very* late in this cycle, but this is (a) obvious and
obviously affecting only minixfs and (b) introduced in this cycle.
diff --git a/fs/minix/inode.c b/fs/minix/inode.c
index c811c19..8e4f5d8 100644
--- a/fs/minix/inode.c
+++ b/fs/minix/inode.c
@@ -262,23 +262,6 @@ static int minix_fill_super(struct super_block *s, void *data, int silent)
goto out_no_root;
}
- ret = -ENOMEM;
- s->s_root = d_alloc_root(root_inode);
- if (!s->s_root)
- goto out_iput;
-
- if (!(s->s_flags & MS_RDONLY)) {
- if (sbi->s_version != MINIX_V3) /* s_state is now out from V3 sb */
- ms->s_state &= ~MINIX_VALID_FS;
- mark_buffer_dirty(bh);
- }
- if (!(sbi->s_mount_state & MINIX_VALID_FS))
- printk("MINIX-fs: mounting unchecked file system, "
- "running fsck is recommended\n");
- else if (sbi->s_mount_state & MINIX_ERROR_FS)
- printk("MINIX-fs: mounting file system with errors, "
- "running fsck is recommended\n");
-
/* Apparently minix can create filesystems that allocate more blocks for
* the bitmaps than needed. We simply ignore that, but verify it didn't
* create one with not enough blocks and bail out if so.
@@ -299,6 +282,23 @@ static int minix_fill_super(struct super_block *s, void *data, int silent)
goto out_iput;
}
+ ret = -ENOMEM;
+ s->s_root = d_alloc_root(root_inode);
+ if (!s->s_root)
+ goto out_iput;
+
+ if (!(s->s_flags & MS_RDONLY)) {
+ if (sbi->s_version != MINIX_V3) /* s_state is now out from V3 sb */
+ ms->s_state &= ~MINIX_VALID_FS;
+ mark_buffer_dirty(bh);
+ }
+ if (!(sbi->s_mount_state & MINIX_VALID_FS))
+ printk("MINIX-fs: mounting unchecked file system, "
+ "running fsck is recommended\n");
+ else if (sbi->s_mount_state & MINIX_ERROR_FS)
+ printk("MINIX-fs: mounting file system with errors, "
+ "running fsck is recommended\n");
+
return 0;
out_iput:
next reply other threads:[~2012-01-04 10:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-04 10:51 Al Viro [this message]
2012-01-04 12:20 ` [patch][regression after 3.1] minixfs: misplaced checks lead to dentry leak Josh Boyer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120104105103.GE23916@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=jwboyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.