From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 236D87F37 for ; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 20:41:28 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4CC1AC002 for ; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 18:41:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from ZenIV.linux.org.uk (zeniv.linux.org.uk [195.92.253.2]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id nQ5JGMuBmzCzBJxD (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 18:41:26 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 02:41:21 +0000 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: inode_permission NULL pointer dereference in 3.13-rc1 Message-ID: <20131129024121.GS10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20131125160648.GA4933@infradead.org> <20131126131134.GM10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20131126141253.GA28062@infradead.org> <20131127064351.GN10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20131127100906.GA19740@infradead.org> <20131128162618.GO10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20131128212301.GP10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20131128225102.GS10988@dastard> <20131128234441.GQ10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-fsdevel , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 06:07:27PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > HOWEVER. It's certainly *not* valid if "current->fs->root/pwd" points > to it. So yeah, there must have been an extra dput() somewhere. Or, > more likely, I think, we don't get the refcount to some dentry > properly any more. > > I don't see where, though. You did change where "LOOKUP_RCU" is > cleared in unlazy_walk() but you did add that > > nd->path.dentry = NULL; > > and that looks like it should be ok. And I don't see what else would care. *nod* BTW, vfsmount refcount is 12, so we *definitely* nowhere near the final mntput(), etc. and mnt->mnt_root itself should also have contributed. I'm going to try to find out _which_ test buggers the refcount - at least that way I'll have something resembling a usable reproducer... _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs