On 2010-02-18, at 22:42, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
+static int do_sys_name_to_handle(const char __user *name,
+ struct file_handle *handle)
+{
+ /* we ask for a non connected handle */
+ retval = exportfs_encode_fh(path.dentry, (struct fid *)f_handle,
+ &handle_size, 0);
+ if (handle_size < handle->handle_size) {
+ if (copy_to_user(handle->f_handle, f_handle,
+ handle_size*sizeof(u32)))
+ retval = -EFAULT;
Shouldn't this be "handle_size <= handle->handle_size"?
+SYSCALL_DEFINE2(name_to_handle, const char __user *, name,
+ struct file_handle __user *, handle)
+{
+ ret = do_sys_name_to_handle(name, &f_handle);
+ if (copy_to_user(&handle->handle_type,
+ &f_handle.handle_type, sizeof(f_handle.handle_type)) ||
+ copy_to_user(&handle->handle_size,
+ &f_handle.handle_size, sizeof(f_handle.handle_size)))
It seems strange to do the copy_to_user() of f_handle in
do_sys_name_to_handle(), but the handle_size and handle_type in
name_to_handle()? Is there a reason it was split this way?
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
