On Sun 30-11-14 00:37:36, Lino Sanfilippo wrote:
> In fanotify_mark_remove_from_mask() a mark is destroyed if only one of both
> bitmasks (mask or ignored_mask) of a mark is cleared. However the other mask
> may still be set and contain information that should not be lost. Thus only
> destroy a mark if both masks are cleared.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lino Sanfilippo <LinoSanfilippo@xxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify_user.c | 6 +++++-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify_user.c b/fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify_user.c
> index c991616..03a0dd1 100644
> --- a/fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify_user.c
> +++ b/fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify_user.c
> @@ -488,6 +488,8 @@ static __u32 fanotify_mark_remove_from_mask(struct fsnotify_mark *fsn_mark,
> int *destroy)
> {
> __u32 oldmask;
> + __u32 new_mask;
> + __u32 new_ignored;
>
> spin_lock(&fsn_mark->lock);
> if (!(flags & FAN_MARK_IGNORED_MASK)) {
> @@ -497,9 +499,11 @@ static __u32 fanotify_mark_remove_from_mask(struct fsnotify_mark *fsn_mark,
> oldmask = fsn_mark->ignored_mask;
> fsnotify_set_mark_ignored_mask_locked(fsn_mark, (oldmask & ~mask));
> }
> + new_mask = fsn_mark->mask;
> + new_ignored = fsn_mark->ignored_mask;
> spin_unlock(&fsn_mark->lock);
>
> - *destroy = !(oldmask & ~mask);
> + *destroy = !(new_mask | new_ignored);
There's no need for new variables, is there? You can just set *destroy
under the spinlock...
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
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
