On 17. 01. 19, 20:28, Ben Hutchings wrote:
I've backported fixes for several security issues involving filesystem validation in f2fs. All of these are already fixed in the later stable branches.
I tested with the reproducers where available. I also checked for regressions with xfstests and didn't find any (but many tests fail with or without these changes).
Hi,
I am thinking why in this patch:
From ec2d979dc3888b6de795344157bb6fe73bbe8e44 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Chao Yu yuchao0@huawei.com Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 14:45:05 +0800 Subject: [PATCH 18/36] f2fs: fix race condition in between free nid allocator/initializer
commit 30a61ddf8117c26ac5b295e1233eaa9629a94ca3 upstream.
you do:
err = 0; list_add_tail(&i->list, &nm_i->free_nid_list); nm_i->fcnt++;+err_out: spin_unlock(&nm_i->free_nid_list_lock); radix_tree_preload_end();
return 1;+err:
if (err)kmem_cache_free(free_nid_slab, i);return !err;
"!err"? Should it be "err < 0 ? err : 1" instead?
thanks,