We have to start by applying the permission restrictions to new_bs before we can loosen them on old_bs. See the comment for the explanation.
Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <mre...@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> --- block.c | 18 +++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/block.c b/block.c index 02157e0652..3029f5c302 100644 --- a/block.c +++ b/block.c @@ -2240,6 +2240,19 @@ static void bdrv_replace_child(BdrvChild *child, BlockDriverState *new_bs) bdrv_replace_child_noperm(child, new_bs); + /* + * Start with the new node's permissions. If @new_bs is a (direct + * or indirect) child of @old_bs, we must complete the permission + * update on @new_bs before we loosen the restrictions on @old_bs. + * Otherwise, bdrv_check_perm() on @old_bs would re-initiate + * updating the permissions of @new_bs, and thus not purely loosen + * restrictions. + */ + if (new_bs) { + bdrv_get_cumulative_perm(new_bs, &perm, &shared_perm); + bdrv_set_perm(new_bs, perm, shared_perm); + } + if (old_bs) { /* Update permissions for old node. This is guaranteed to succeed * because we're just taking a parent away, so we're loosening @@ -2248,11 +2261,6 @@ static void bdrv_replace_child(BdrvChild *child, BlockDriverState *new_bs) bdrv_check_perm(old_bs, NULL, perm, shared_perm, NULL, &error_abort); bdrv_set_perm(old_bs, perm, shared_perm); } - - if (new_bs) { - bdrv_get_cumulative_perm(new_bs, &perm, &shared_perm); - bdrv_set_perm(new_bs, perm, shared_perm); - } } /* -- 2.21.0