Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753592AbbEKJza (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 May 2015 05:55:30 -0400 Received: from mail-pd0-f179.google.com ([209.85.192.179]:32952 "EHLO mail-pd0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753532AbbEKJzK (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 May 2015 05:55:10 -0400 Date: Mon, 11 May 2015 18:54:58 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <20150511.185458.913750783836948467.konishi.ryusuke@lab.ntt.co.jp> To: NeilBrown Cc: Josef Bacik , Chris Mason , Jan Kara , David Sterba , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-nilfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] NILFS2: support NFSv2 export From: Ryusuke Konishi In-Reply-To: <20150511170251.4fb69e52@notabene.brown> References: <20150508001623.31129.25102.stgit@notabene.brown> <20150511.013143.706881749197692581.konishi.ryusuke@lab.ntt.co.jp> <20150511170251.4fb69e52@notabene.brown> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.6 on Emacs 24.3 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2860 Lines: 80 On Mon, 11 May 2015 17:02:51 +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > On Mon, 11 May 2015 01:31:43 +0900 (JST) Ryusuke Konishi > wrote: > >> On Fri, 08 May 2015 10:16:23 +1000, NeilBrown wrote: >> > The "fh_len" passed to ->fh_to_* is not guaranteed to be that same as >> > that returned by encode_fh - it may be larger. >> > >> > With NFSv2, the filehandle is fixed length, so it may appear longer >> > than expected and be zero-padded. >> > >> > So we must test that fh_len is at least some value, not exactly equal >> > to it. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown >> > --- >> > fs/nilfs2/namei.c | 6 +++--- >> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/fs/nilfs2/namei.c b/fs/nilfs2/namei.c >> > index 22180836ec22..b65fb79d16fd 100644 >> > --- a/fs/nilfs2/namei.c >> > +++ b/fs/nilfs2/namei.c >> > @@ -496,8 +496,8 @@ static struct dentry *nilfs_fh_to_dentry(struct super_block *sb, struct fid *fh, >> > { >> > struct nilfs_fid *fid = (struct nilfs_fid *)fh; >> > >> > - if ((fh_len != NILFS_FID_SIZE_NON_CONNECTABLE && >> > - fh_len != NILFS_FID_SIZE_CONNECTABLE) || >> >> > + if ((fh_len < NILFS_FID_SIZE_NON_CONNECTABLE && >> > + fh_len < NILFS_FID_SIZE_CONNECTABLE) || >> > (fh_type != FILEID_NILFS_WITH_PARENT && >> > fh_type != FILEID_NILFS_WITHOUT_PARENT)) >> > return NULL; >> >> A bit weird. "fh_len < NILFS_FID_SIZE_CONNECTABLE" implies "fh_len < >> NILFS_FID_SIZE_NON_CONNECTABLE". >> >> How about the following fix ? >> >> if ((fh_type != FILEID_NILFS_WITH_PARENT || >> fh_len < NILFS_FID_SIZE_CONNECTABLE) && >> (fh_type != FILEID_NILFS_WITHOUT_PARENT || >> fh_len < NILFS_FID_SIZE_NON_CONNECTABLE)) >> return NULL; >> > > Yes, weird. The code only uses the early parts of the filehandle, so we > only need to complain if the fh_len is less than FILEID_NILFS_WITHOUT_PARENT. > > So I'd prefer: > > @@ -496,8 +496,7 @@ static struct dentry *nilfs_fh_to_dentry(struct super_block *sb, struct fid *fh, > { > struct nilfs_fid *fid = (struct nilfs_fid *)fh; > > - if ((fh_len != NILFS_FID_SIZE_NON_CONNECTABLE && > - fh_len != NILFS_FID_SIZE_CONNECTABLE) || > + if (fh_len < NILFS_FID_SIZE_NON_CONNECTABLE || > (fh_type != FILEID_NILFS_WITH_PARENT && > fh_type != FILEID_NILFS_WITHOUT_PARENT)) > return NULL; > > > Would you be OK with that? If so I'll resend. > > Thanks, > NeilBrown Thanks. This looks OK to me. I'll apply it if you will resend. Regards, Ryusuke Konishi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/