On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 02:14:35PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 12:56 +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > > --- a/fs/proc/inode.c > > +++ b/fs/proc/inode.c > > @@ -167,8 +167,9 @@ static loff_t proc_reg_llseek(struct fil > > llseek = pde->proc_fops->llseek; > > spin_unlock(&pde->pde_unload_lock); > > > > - if (llseek) > > - rv = llseek(file, offset, whence); > > + if (!llseek) > > + llseek = default_llseek; > > + rv = llseek(file, offset, whence); > > > > this has potential impact way outside kcore...... > > did you audit all proc users to see if they can deal with lseek?
Mainline deals with lseek on proc entries as follows: * use default_llseek() * but if proc entry set ->llseek via ->proc_fops, use custom llseek With introduction of proxying, ->llseek was suddenly set on all proc entries, so default_llseek() was never used, but -E started to be returned for all of them that were relying on default_llseek(). So this patch brings proc_reg_llseek() in sync with vfs_llseek(). - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
