In 3eab9d7bc2f4 ("fuse: convert readahead to use folios"), I converted
us to using the new folio readahead code, which drops the reference on
the folio once it is locked, using an inferred reference on the folio.
Previously we held a reference on the folio for the entire duration of
the readpages call.
This is fine, however I failed to catch the case for splice pipe
responses where we will remove the old folio and splice in the new
folio. Here we assumed that there is a reference held on the folio for
ap->folios, which is no longer the case.
To fix this, simply drop the extra put to keep us consistent with the
non-splice variation. This will fix the UAF bug that was reported.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/2f681f48-00f5-4e09-8431-2b3dbfaa881e@xxxxxxxxx/
Fixes: 3eab9d7bc2f4 ("fuse: convert readahead to use folios")
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/fuse/dev.c | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/fuse/dev.c b/fs/fuse/dev.c
index 5b5f789b37eb..5bd6e2e184c0 100644
--- a/fs/fuse/dev.c
+++ b/fs/fuse/dev.c
@@ -918,8 +918,6 @@ static int fuse_try_move_page(struct fuse_copy_state *cs, struct page **pagep)
}
folio_unlock(oldfolio);
- /* Drop ref for ap->pages[] array */
- folio_put(oldfolio);
cs->len = 0;
err = 0;
--
2.43.0
