Hi Ian,
On Sat, 18 Dec 2010, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In fs/autofs4/dev-ioctl.c::autofs_dev_ioctl_setpipefd() we call fget(),
> which may return NULL, but we do not explicitly test for that NULL return
> so we may end up dereferencing a NULL pointer - bad.
>
> When I originally submitted this patch I had chosen EBUSY as the return
> value to use if this happens. Ian Kent was kind enough to explain why that
> would most likely be wrong and why EBADF should most likely be used
> instead. This version of the patch uses EBADF.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <j...@chaosbits.net>
> ---
> dev-ioctl.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/autofs4/dev-ioctl.c b/fs/autofs4/dev-ioctl.c
> index eff9a41..a650d7e 100644
> --- a/fs/autofs4/dev-ioctl.c
> +++ b/fs/autofs4/dev-ioctl.c
> @@ -372,6 +372,10 @@ static int autofs_dev_ioctl_setpipefd(struct file *fp,
> return -EBUSY;
> } else {
> struct file *pipe = fget(pipefd);
> + if (!pipe) {
> + err = -EBADF;
> + goto out;
> + }
> if (!pipe->f_op || !pipe->f_op->write) {
> err = -EPIPE;
> fput(pipe);
>
It's been more than a month now since I submitted this updated patch
adressing your feedback, but I've not seen any feedback on it.
Is it OK? Will you merge it?
/Jesper
--
Jesper Juhl <j...@chaosbits.net> http://www.chaosbits.net/
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please.
_______________________________________________
autofs mailing list
autofs@linux.kernel.org
http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
