Re: d_instantiate() and unlock_new_inode() order in btrfs_mkdir()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: d_instantiate() and unlock_new_inode() order in btrfs_mkdir()
From: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 01:06:13 +0100
Cc: linux-btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Chris Mason <clm@xxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20180419000029.GA133757@gmail.com>
User-agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 05:00:29PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> Hi Chris and other btrfs folks,
> 
> btrfs_mkdir() calls d_instantiate() before unlock_new_inode(), which is wrong
> because it exposes the inode to lookups before it's been fully initialized.

Huh?  It *is* fully initialized by that point; what else is left to do?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: d_instantiate() and unlock_new_inode() order in btrfs_mkdir()
  - From: Al Viro

References:
- d_instantiate() and unlock_new_inode() order in btrfs_mkdir()
  - From: Eric Biggers

Prev by Date: [PATCH] fsnotify: Fix fsnotify_mark_connector race
Next by Date: Re: [RFC PATCH ghak32 V2 02/13] audit: check children and threading before allowing containerid
Previous by thread: d_instantiate() and unlock_new_inode() order in btrfs_mkdir()
Next by thread: Re: d_instantiate() and unlock_new_inode() order in btrfs_mkdir()
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux Ext4 Filesystem] [Union Filesystem] [Filesystem Testing] [Ceph Users] [Ecryptfs] [AutoFS] [Kernel Newbies] [Share Photos] [Security] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux Cachefs] [Reiser Filesystem] [Linux RAID] [Samba] [Device Mapper] [CEPH Development]

Powered by Linux