locks: fix posix lock range overflow handling
In the 32-bit case fcntl assigns the 64-bit f_pos and i_size to a 32-bit off_t. The existing range checks also seem to depend on signed arithmetic wrapping when it overflows. In practice maybe that works, but we can be more careful. That also allows us to make a more reliable distinction between -EINVAL and -EOVERFLOW. Note that in the 32-bit case SEEK_CUR or SEEK_END might allow the caller to set a lock with starting point no longer representable as a 32-bit value. We could return -EOVERFLOW in such cases, but the locks code is capable of handling such ranges, so we choose to be lenient here. The only problem is that subsequent GETLK calls on such a lock will fail with EOVERFLOW. While we're here, do some cleanup including consolidating code for the flock and flock64 cases. Signed-off-by: NJ. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org> Signed-off-by: NJeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Showing
想要评论请 注册 或 登录