On Thu, 2022-09-01 at 07:27 +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> Propagate the error code returned by memdup_user() instead of a hard coded
> -EFAULT.
>
> Suggested-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> This patch is speculative. The whole call chains have not been checked to
> see if there was no path explicitly expecting a -EFAULT.
> ---
> fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c
> index 2968cf604e3b..78b8cd9651d5 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c
> @@ -808,7 +808,7 @@ __cld_pipe_inprogress_downcall(const struct cld_msg_v2 __user *cmsg,
> return -EFAULT;
> name.data = memdup_user(&ci->cc_name.cn_id, namelen);
> if (IS_ERR(name.data))
> - return -EFAULT;
> + return PTR_ERR(name.data);
> name.len = namelen;
> get_user(princhashlen, &ci->cc_princhash.cp_len);
> if (princhashlen > 0) {
> @@ -817,7 +817,7 @@ __cld_pipe_inprogress_downcall(const struct cld_msg_v2 __user *cmsg,
> princhashlen);
> if (IS_ERR(princhash.data)) {
> kfree(name.data);
> - return -EFAULT;
> + return PTR_ERR(princhash.data);
> }
> princhash.len = princhashlen;
> } else
> @@ -830,7 +830,7 @@ __cld_pipe_inprogress_downcall(const struct cld_msg_v2 __user *cmsg,
> return -EFAULT;
> name.data = memdup_user(&cnm->cn_id, namelen);
> if (IS_ERR(name.data))
> - return -EFAULT;
> + return PTR_ERR(name.data);
> name.len = namelen;
> }
> if (name.len > 5 && memcmp(name.data, "hash:", 5) == 0) {
I *think* this error gets propagated to userland on a write to
rpc_pipefs, and the callers already handle a variety of errors. This
looks reasonable to me.
Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
