Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] fs: Fix memory leaks in do_renameat2() error paths
To:     Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Qian Cai <cai@redhat.com>
Cc:     linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20201030152407.43598-1-cai@redhat.com>
 <20201030184255.GP3576660@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Message-ID: <ad9357e9-8364-a316-392d-7504af614cac@kernel.dk>
Date:   Fri, 30 Oct 2020 12:46:26 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20201030184255.GP3576660@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 10/30/20 12:42 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 11:24:07AM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
>> We will need to call putname() before do_renameat2() returning -EINVAL
>> to avoid memory leaks.
>>
>> Fixes: 3c5499fa56f5 ("fs: make do_renameat2() take struct filename")
>> Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <cai@redhat.com>
> 
> May I ask where has the original commit been posted for review?  And why
> the bleeding hell does io_uring touch rename-related codepaths in the
> first place?

See other reply, it's being posted soon, just haven't gotten there yet
and it wasn't ready.

It's a prep patch so we can call do_renameat2 and pass in a filename
instead. The intent is not to have any functional changes in that prep
patch. But once we can pass in filenames instead of user pointers, it's
usable from io_uring.

I'll post this as soon as I get around to it, it's been on the back
burner for the last month or so.

-- 
Jens Axboe