2022-03-01 13:21 GMT+09:00, Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On (22/03/01 08:48), Namjae Jeon wrote:
>> diff --git a/fs/ksmbd/smb2pdu.c b/fs/ksmbd/smb2pdu.c
>> index 3151ab7d7410..03c3733e54e4 100644
>> --- a/fs/ksmbd/smb2pdu.c
>> +++ b/fs/ksmbd/smb2pdu.c
>> @@ -5764,8 +5764,10 @@ static int set_rename_info(struct ksmbd_work *work,
>> struct ksmbd_file *fp,
>> if (parent_fp) {
>> if (parent_fp->daccess & FILE_DELETE_LE) {
>> pr_err("parent dir is opened with delete access\n");
>> + ksmbd_fd_put(work, parent_fp);
>> return -ESHARE;
>> }
>> + ksmbd_fd_put(work, parent_fp);
>> }
>
> And also in ksmbd_validate_entry_in_use()?
ksmbd_validate_entry_in_use() is removed in 4/4 patch.
I need to change the order of the patches to avoid confusion.
Thanks!
>
>> next:
>> return smb2_rename(work, fp, user_ns, rename_info,
>> diff --git a/fs/ksmbd/vfs_cache.c b/fs/ksmbd/vfs_cache.c
>> index 0974d2e972b9..c4d59d2735f0 100644
>> --- a/fs/ksmbd/vfs_cache.c
>> +++ b/fs/ksmbd/vfs_cache.c
>> @@ -496,6 +496,7 @@ struct ksmbd_file *ksmbd_lookup_fd_inode(struct inode
>> *inode)
>> list_for_each_entry(lfp, &ci->m_fp_list, node) {
>> if (inode == file_inode(lfp->filp)) {
>> atomic_dec(&ci->m_count);
>> + lfp = ksmbd_fp_get(lfp);
>> read_unlock(&ci->m_lock);
>> return lfp;
>> }
>> --
>> 2.25.1
>>
>
