On Fri, Jul 06, 2018 at 11:12:27AM +0800, Shan Hai wrote:
> The XFS_ILOCK_SHARED type lock is held in the xfs_ioc_fsgetxattr
> but does not released when the inode is in local format, fix it by
> eleasing the lock on the local format inode.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shan Hai <shan.hai@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c
> index 0ef5ece5634c..246562615ccd 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c
> @@ -907,7 +907,10 @@ xfs_ioc_fsgetxattr(
> } else {
> if (ip->i_df.if_flags & XFS_IFEXTENTS)
> fa.fsx_nextents = xfs_iext_count(&ip->i_df);
> - else
> + else if (ip->i_df.if_flags & XFS_IFINLINE) {
> + xfs_iunlock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_SHARED);
> + return 0;
> + } else
> fa.fsx_nextents = ip->i_d.di_nextents;
> }
> xfs_iunlock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_SHARED);
This looks odd, and the changelog confuses even more.
Please avoid the early return, which means we miss the copy_to_user
of the fa struct. It seems to me like this should be something like:
if (ip->i_df.if_flags & XFS_IFEXTENTS)
fa.fsx_nextents = xfs_iext_count(&ip->i_df);
esle if (ip->i_df.if_flags & XFS_IFINLINE)
fa.fsx_nextents = 0;
else
fa.fsx_nextents = ip->i_d.di_nextents;
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
