On Sun, 1 Jan 2012 17:35:18 -0600 Steve French <smfrench@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Any easy repro? Not for me. It seems to depend on a variety of factors including the infolevel used, the length of the filenames, and possibly their order in the response. > On Jan 1, 2012 9:34 AM, "Jeff Layton" <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > The current check looks to see if the RFC1002 length is larger than > > CIFSMaxBufSize, and fails if it is. The buffer is actually larger than > > that by MAX_CIFS_HDR_SIZE. > > > > This bug has been around for a long time, but the fact that we used to > > cap the clients MaxBufferSize at the same level as the server tended > > to paper over it. Commit c974befa changed that however and caused this > > bug to bite in more cases. > > > > Reported-and-Tested-by: Konstantinos Skarlatos <k.skarlatos@xxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > fs/cifs/connect.c | 2 +- > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/cifs/connect.c b/fs/cifs/connect.c > > index 8cd4b52..27c4f25 100644 > > --- a/fs/cifs/connect.c > > +++ b/fs/cifs/connect.c > > @@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ static int coalesce_t2(struct smb_hdr *psecond, struct > > smb_hdr *pTargetSMB) > > byte_count = be32_to_cpu(pTargetSMB->smb_buf_length); > > byte_count += total_in_buf2; > > /* don't allow buffer to overflow */ > > - if (byte_count > CIFSMaxBufSize) > > + if (byte_count > CIFSMaxBufSize + MAX_CIFS_HDR_SIZE - 4) > > return -ENOBUFS; > > pTargetSMB->smb_buf_length = cpu_to_be32(byte_count); > > > > -- > > 1.7.7.4 > > > > -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
