Skip to content
体验新版
项目
组织
正在加载...
登录
切换导航
打开侧边栏
openeuler
raspberrypi-kernel
提交
806b681c
R
raspberrypi-kernel
项目概览
openeuler
/
raspberrypi-kernel
通知
13
Star
1
Fork
0
代码
文件
提交
分支
Tags
贡献者
分支图
Diff
Issue
0
列表
看板
标记
里程碑
合并请求
0
Wiki
0
Wiki
分析
仓库
DevOps
项目成员
Pages
R
raspberrypi-kernel
项目概览
项目概览
详情
发布
仓库
仓库
文件
提交
分支
标签
贡献者
分支图
比较
Issue
0
Issue
0
列表
看板
标记
里程碑
合并请求
0
合并请求
0
Pages
分析
分析
仓库分析
DevOps
Wiki
0
Wiki
成员
成员
收起侧边栏
关闭侧边栏
动态
分支图
创建新Issue
提交
Issue看板
提交
806b681c
编写于
12月 26, 2009
作者:
A
Al Viro
浏览文件
操作
浏览文件
下载
电子邮件补丁
差异文件
Turn do_link spaghetty into a normal loop
Signed-off-by:
N
Al Viro
<
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk
>
上级
10fa8e62
变更
1
隐藏空白更改
内联
并排
Showing
1 changed file
with
38 addition
and
45 deletion
+38
-45
fs/namei.c
fs/namei.c
+38
-45
未找到文件。
fs/namei.c
浏览文件 @
806b681c
...
...
@@ -1844,17 +1844,38 @@ struct file *do_filp_open(int dfd, const char *pathname,
if
(
open_flag
&
O_EXCL
)
nd
.
flags
|=
LOOKUP_EXCL
;
filp
=
do_last
(
&
nd
,
&
path
,
open_flag
,
acc_mode
,
mode
,
pathname
);
if
(
!
filp
)
goto
do_link
;
goto
out
;
exit_dput:
path_put_conditional
(
&
path
,
&
nd
);
if
(
!
IS_ERR
(
nd
.
intent
.
open
.
file
))
release_open_intent
(
&
nd
);
exit_parent:
path_put
(
&
nd
.
path
);
filp
=
ERR_PTR
(
error
);
while
(
unlikely
(
!
filp
))
{
/* trailing symlink */
error
=
-
ELOOP
;
if
((
open_flag
&
O_NOFOLLOW
)
||
count
++
==
32
)
goto
exit_dput
;
/*
* This is subtle. Instead of calling do_follow_link() we do
* the thing by hands. The reason is that this way we have zero
* link_count and path_walk() (called from ->follow_link)
* honoring LOOKUP_PARENT. After that we have the parent and
* last component, i.e. we are in the same situation as after
* the first path_walk(). Well, almost - if the last component
* is normal we get its copy stored in nd->last.name and we will
* have to putname() it when we are done. Procfs-like symlinks
* just set LAST_BIND.
*/
nd
.
flags
|=
LOOKUP_PARENT
;
error
=
security_inode_follow_link
(
path
.
dentry
,
&
nd
);
if
(
error
)
goto
exit_dput
;
error
=
__do_follow_link
(
&
path
,
&
nd
);
path_put
(
&
path
);
if
(
error
)
{
/* nd.path had been dropped */
release_open_intent
(
&
nd
);
filp
=
ERR_PTR
(
error
);
goto
out
;
}
nd
.
flags
&=
~
LOOKUP_PARENT
;
filp
=
do_last
(
&
nd
,
&
path
,
open_flag
,
acc_mode
,
mode
,
pathname
);
if
(
nd
.
last_type
==
LAST_NORM
)
__putname
(
nd
.
last
.
name
);
}
out:
if
(
nd
.
root
.
mnt
)
path_put
(
&
nd
.
root
);
...
...
@@ -1864,41 +1885,13 @@ struct file *do_filp_open(int dfd, const char *pathname,
}
return
filp
;
do_link:
error
=
-
ELOOP
;
if
((
open_flag
&
O_NOFOLLOW
)
||
count
++
==
32
)
goto
exit_dput
;
/*
* This is subtle. Instead of calling do_follow_link() we do the
* thing by hands. The reason is that this way we have zero link_count
* and path_walk() (called from ->follow_link) honoring LOOKUP_PARENT.
* After that we have the parent and last component, i.e.
* we are in the same situation as after the first path_walk().
* Well, almost - if the last component is normal we get its copy
* stored in nd->last.name and we will have to putname() it when we
* are done. Procfs-like symlinks just set LAST_BIND.
*/
nd
.
flags
|=
LOOKUP_PARENT
;
error
=
security_inode_follow_link
(
path
.
dentry
,
&
nd
);
if
(
error
)
goto
exit_dput
;
error
=
__do_follow_link
(
&
path
,
&
nd
);
path_put
(
&
path
);
if
(
error
)
{
/* Does someone understand code flow here? Or it is only
* me so stupid? Anathema to whoever designed this non-sense
* with "intent.open".
*/
exit_dput:
path_put_conditional
(
&
path
,
&
nd
);
if
(
!
IS_ERR
(
nd
.
intent
.
open
.
file
))
release_open_intent
(
&
nd
);
filp
=
ERR_PTR
(
error
);
goto
out
;
}
nd
.
flags
&=
~
LOOKUP_PARENT
;
filp
=
do_last
(
&
nd
,
&
path
,
open_flag
,
acc_mode
,
mode
,
pathname
);
if
(
nd
.
last_type
==
LAST_NORM
)
__putname
(
nd
.
last
.
name
);
if
(
!
filp
)
goto
do_link
;
exit_parent:
path_put
(
&
nd
.
path
);
filp
=
ERR_PTR
(
error
);
goto
out
;
}
...
...
编辑
预览
Markdown
is supported
0%
请重试
或
添加新附件
.
添加附件
取消
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
先完成此消息的编辑!
取消
想要评论请
注册
或
登录