1. 12 4月, 2015 14 次提交
  2. 26 3月, 2015 1 次提交
  3. 25 3月, 2015 4 次提交
  4. 20 3月, 2015 1 次提交
    • C
      Subject: nfsd: don't recursively call nfsd4_cb_layout_fail · 133d5582
      Christoph Hellwig 提交于
      Due to a merge error when creating c5c707f9 ("nfsd: implement pNFS
      layout recalls"), we recursively call nfsd4_cb_layout_fail from itself,
      leading to stack overflows.
      Signed-off-by: NChristoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
      Fixes:  c5c707f9 ("nfsd: implement pNFS layout recalls")
      Signed-off-by: NJ. Bruce Fields <bfields@redhat.com>
      ---
       fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c | 2 --
       1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
      
      diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c
      index 3c1bfa1..1028a06 100644
      --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c
      +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c
      @@ -587,8 +587,6 @@ nfsd4_cb_layout_fail(struct nfs4_layout_stateid *ls)
      
       	rpc_ntop((struct sockaddr *)&clp->cl_addr, addr_str, sizeof(addr_str));
      
      -	nfsd4_cb_layout_fail(ls);
      -
       	printk(KERN_WARNING
       		"nfsd: client %s failed to respond to layout recall. "
       		"  Fencing..\n", addr_str);
      --
      1.9.1
      133d5582
  5. 19 3月, 2015 1 次提交
    • T
      fuse: explicitly set /dev/fuse file's private_data · 94e4fe2c
      Tom Van Braeckel 提交于
      The misc subsystem (which is used for /dev/fuse) initializes private_data to
      point to the misc device when a driver has registered a custom open file
      operation, and initializes it to NULL when a custom open file operation has
      *not* been provided.
      
      This subtle quirk is confusing, to the point where kernel code registers
      *empty* file open operations to have private_data point to the misc device
      structure. And it leads to bugs, where the addition or removal of a custom open
      file operation surprisingly changes the initial contents of a file's
      private_data structure.
      
      So to simplify things in the misc subsystem, a patch [1] has been proposed to
      *always* set the private_data to point to the misc device, instead of only
      doing this when a custom open file operation has been registered.
      
      But before this patch can be applied we need to modify drivers that make the
      assumption that a misc device file's private_data is initialized to NULL
      because they didn't register a custom open file operation, so they don't rely
      on this assumption anymore. FUSE uses private_data to store the fuse_conn and
      errors out if this is not initialized to NULL at mount time.
      
      Hence, we now set a file's private_data to NULL explicitly, to be independent
      of whatever value the misc subsystem initializes it to by default.
      
      [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/12/4/939Reported-by: NGiedrius Statkevicius <giedriuswork@gmail.com>
      Reported-by: NThierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
      Signed-off-by: NTom Van Braeckel <tomvanbraeckel@gmail.com>
      Signed-off-by: NMiklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
      94e4fe2c
  6. 18 3月, 2015 8 次提交
    • H
      ovl: upper fs should not be R/O · 71cbad7e
      hujianyang 提交于
      After importing multi-lower layer support, users could mount a r/o
      partition as the left most lowerdir instead of using it as upperdir.
      And a r/o upperdir may cause an error like
      
      	overlayfs: failed to create directory ./workdir/work
      
      during mount.
      
      This patch check the *s_flags* of upper fs and return an error if
      it is a r/o partition. The checking of *upper_mnt->mnt_sb->s_flags*
      can be removed now.
      
      This patch also remove
      
      	/* FIXME: workdir is not needed for a R/O mount */
      
      from ovl_fill_super() because:
      
      1) for upper fs r/o case
      Setting a r/o partition as upper is prevented, no need to care about
      workdir in this case.
      
      2) for "mount overlay -o ro" with a r/w upper fs case
      Users could remount overlayfs to r/w in this case, so workdir should
      not be omitted.
      Signed-off-by: Nhujianyang <hujianyang@huawei.com>
      Signed-off-by: NMiklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
      71cbad7e
    • H
      ovl: check lowerdir amount for non-upper mount · 6be4506e
      hujianyang 提交于
      Recently multi-lower layer mount support allow upperdir and workdir
      to be omitted, then cause overlayfs can be mount with only one
      lowerdir directory. This action make no sense and have potential risk.
      
      This patch check the total number of lower directories to prevent
      mounting overlayfs with only one directory.
      
      Also, an error message is added to indicate lower directories exceed
      OVL_MAX_STACK limit.
      Signed-off-by: Nhujianyang <hujianyang@huawei.com>
      Signed-off-by: NMiklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
      6be4506e
    • H
      ovl: print error message for invalid mount options · bead55ef
      hujianyang 提交于
      Overlayfs should print an error message if an incorrect mount option
      is caught like other filesystems.
      
      After this patch, improper option input could be clearly known.
      Reported-by: NFabian Sturm <fabian.sturm@aduu.de>
      Signed-off-by: Nhujianyang <hujianyang@huawei.com>
      Signed-off-by: NMiklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
      bead55ef
    • J
      Btrfs: fix outstanding_extents accounting in DIO · e1cbbfa5
      Josef Bacik 提交于
      We are keeping track of how many extents we need to reserve properly based on
      the amount we want to write, but we were still incrementing outstanding_extents
      if we wrote less than what we requested.  This isn't quite right since we will
      be limited to our max extent size.  So instead lets do something horrible!  Keep
      track of how many outstanding_extents we reserved, and decrement each time we
      allocate an extent.  If we use our entire reserve make sure to jack up
      outstanding_extents on the inode so the accounting works out properly.  Thanks,
      Reported-by: NFilipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
      Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
      e1cbbfa5
    • J
      Btrfs: add sanity test for outstanding_extents accounting · 6a3891c5
      Josef Bacik 提交于
      I introduced a regression wrt outstanding_extents accounting.  These are tricky
      areas that aren't easily covered by xfstests as we could change MAX_EXTENT_SIZE
      at any time.  So add sanity tests to cover the various conditions that are
      tricky in order to make sure we don't introduce regressions in the future.
      Thanks,
      Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
      6a3891c5
    • J
      Btrfs: just free dummy extent buffers · bcb7e449
      Josef Bacik 提交于
      If we fail during our sanity tests we could get NULL deref's because we unload
      the module before the dummy extent buffers are free'd via RCU.  So check for
      this case and just free the things directly.  Thanks,
      Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
      bcb7e449
    • J
      Btrfs: account merges/splits properly · ba117213
      Josef Bacik 提交于
      My fix
      
      Btrfs: fix merge delalloc logic
      
      only fixed half of the problems, it didn't fix the case where we have two large
      extents on either side and then join them together with a new small extent.  We
      need to instead keep track of how many extents we have accounted for with each
      side of the new extent, and then see how many extents we need for the new large
      extent.  If they match then we know we need to keep our reservation, otherwise
      we need to drop our reservation.  This shows up with a case like this
      
      [BTRFS_MAX_EXTENT_SIZE+4K][4K HOLE][BTRFS_MAX_EXTENT_SIZE+4K]
      
      Previously the logic would have said that the number extents required for the
      new size (3) is larger than the number of extents required for the largest side
      (2) therefore we need to keep our reservation.  But this isn't the case, since
      both sides require a reservation of 2 which leads to 4 for the whole range
      currently reserved, but we only need 3, so we need to drop one of the
      reservations.  The same problem existed for splits, we'd think we only need 3
      extents when creating the hole but in reality we need 4.  Thanks,
      Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
      ba117213
    • K
      pagemap: do not leak physical addresses to non-privileged userspace · ab676b7d
      Kirill A. Shutemov 提交于
      As pointed by recent post[1] on exploiting DRAM physical imperfection,
      /proc/PID/pagemap exposes sensitive information which can be used to do
      attacks.
      
      This disallows anybody without CAP_SYS_ADMIN to read the pagemap.
      
      [1] http://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2015/03/exploiting-dram-rowhammer-bug-to-gain.html
      
      [ Eventually we might want to do anything more finegrained, but for now
        this is the simple model.   - Linus ]
      Signed-off-by: NKirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
      Acked-by: NKonstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@openvz.org>
      Acked-by: NAndy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
      Cc: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@parallels.com>
      Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
      Cc: Mark Seaborn <mseaborn@chromium.org>
      Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
      Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      ab676b7d
  7. 17 3月, 2015 2 次提交
  8. 14 3月, 2015 9 次提交
新手
引导
客服 返回
顶部