On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 09:30:20AM +0800, Chuhong Yuan wrote: > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 8:07 AM Ernesto A. Fernández > <ernesto.mnd.fernandez@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 08:06:20PM +0800, Chuhong Yuan wrote: > > > hfs_brec_update_parent misses a check for hfs_bnode_find and may miss > > > the failure. > > > Add a check for it like what is done in again. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chuhong Yuan <hslester96@xxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > fs/hfsplus/brec.c | 2 ++ > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/hfsplus/brec.c b/fs/hfsplus/brec.c > > > index 1918544a7871..22bada8288c4 100644 > > > --- a/fs/hfsplus/brec.c > > > +++ b/fs/hfsplus/brec.c > > > @@ -434,6 +434,8 @@ static int hfs_brec_update_parent(struct hfs_find_data *fd) > > > new_node->parent = tree->root; > > > } > > > fd->bnode = hfs_bnode_find(tree, new_node->parent); > > > + if (IS_ERR(fd->bnode)) > > > + return PTR_ERR(fd->bnode); > > > > You shouldn't just return here, you still hold a reference to new_node. > > The call to hfs_bnode_find() after the again label seems to be making a > > similar mistake. > > > > I don't think either one can actually fail though, because the parent > > nodes have all been read and hashed before, haven't they? > > > > I find that after hfs_bnode_findhash in hfs_bnode_find, there is a test for > HFS_BNODE_ERROR and may return an error. I'm not sure whether it > can happen here. That would require a race between hfs_bnode_find() and hfs_bnode_create(), but the node has already been created. > > > > /* create index key and entry */ > > > hfs_bnode_read_key(new_node, fd->search_key, 14); > > > cnid = cpu_to_be32(new_node->this); > > > -- > > > 2.20.1 > > >
