- 11 5月, 2015 40 次提交
-
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
... if it decides to follow, that is. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
instead of a single flag (!= 0 => we want to follow symlinks) pass two bits - WALK_GET (want to follow symlinks) and WALK_PUT (put_link() once we are done looking at the name). The latter matters only for success exits - on failure the caller will discard everything anyway. Suggestions for better variant are welcome; what this thing aims for is making sure that pending put_link() is done *before* walk_component() decides to pick a symlink up, rather than between picking it up and acting upon it. See the next commit for payoff. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
fewer labels that way; in particular, resuming after the end of nested symlink is straight-line. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
All callers of terminate_walk() are followed by more or less open-coded eqiuvalent of "do put_link() on everything left in nd->stack". Better done in terminate_walk() itself, and when we go for RCU symlink traversal we'll have to do it there anyway. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
rationale: we'll need to have terminate_walk() do put_link() on everything, which will mean that in some cases ..._last() will do put_link() anyway. Easier to have them do it in all cases. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
follow_dotdot_rcu() does an equivalent of terminate_walk() on failure; shifting it into callers makes for simpler rules and those callers already have terminate_walk() on other failure exits. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
The only reason why we needed one more was that purely nested MAXSYMLINKS symlinks could lead to path_init() using that many entries in addition to nd->stack[0] which it left unused. That can't happen now - path_init() starts with entry 0 (and trailing_symlink() is called only when we'd already encountered one symlink, so no more than MAXSYMLINKS-1 are left). Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
get rid of orig_depth - we only use it on error exit to tell whether to stop doing put_link() when depth reaches 0 (call from path_init()) or when it reaches 1 (call from trailing_symlink()). However, in the latter case the caller would immediately follow with one more put_link(). Just keep doing it until the depth reaches zero (and simplify trailing_symlink() as the result). Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
Get rid of orig_depth checks in OK: logics. If nd->depth is zero, we had been called from path_init() and we are done. If it is greater than 1, we are not done, whether we'd been called from path_init() or trailing_symlink(). And in case when it's 1, we might have been called from path_init() and reached the end of nested symlink (in which case nd->stack[0].name will point to the rest of pathname and we are not done) or from trailing_symlink(), in which case we are done. Just have trailing_symlink() leave NULL in nd->stack[0].name and use that to discriminate between those cases. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
Make link_path_walk() work with any value of nd->depth on entry - memorize it and use it in tests instead of comparing with 1. Don't bother with increment/decrement in path_init(). Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
all calls are preceded by decrement of nd->depth; move it into put_link() itself. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
move decrement of nd->depth on successful returns into the callers. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
make get_link() increment nd->depth on successful exit Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
move increment of ->depth to the point where we'd discovered that get_link() has not returned an error, adjust exits accordingly. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
lift increment/decrement into link_path_walk() callers. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
remove decrement/increment surrounding nd_alloc_stack(), adjust the test in it. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
collapse adjacent increment/decrement pairs. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
nd->stack[0] is unused until the handling of trailing symlinks and we want to get rid of that. Having fucked that transformation up several times, I went for bloody pedantic series of provably equivalent transformations. Sorry. Step 1: keep nd->depth higher by one in link_path_walk() - increment upon entry, decrement on exits, adjust the arithmetics inside and surround the calls of functions that care about nd->depth value (nd_alloc_stack(), get_link(), put_link()) with decrement/increment pairs. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
The only restriction is that on the total amount of symlinks crossed; how they are nested does not matter Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
same story as the previous commit Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
Array of MAX_NESTED_LINKS + 1 elements put into nameidata; what used to be a local array in link_path_walk() occupies entries 1 .. MAX_NESTED_LINKS in it, link and cookie from the trailing symlink handling loops - entry 0. This is _not_ the final arrangement; just an easily verified incremental step. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
Deal with skipping leading slashes before what used to be the recursive call. That way we can get rid of that goto completely. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
absolutely straightforward now - the only variables we need to preserve across the recursive call are name, link and cookie, and recursion depth is limited (and can is equal to nd->depth). So arrange an array of triples to hold instances of those and be done with that. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
reduce the number of returns in there - turn all places where it returns zero into goto OK and places where it returns non-zero into goto Err. The only non-trivial detail is that all breaks in the loop are guaranteed to be with non-zero err. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
What we do after the second walk_component() + put_link() + depth decrement in there is exactly equivalent to what's done right after the first walk_component(). Easy to verify and not at all surprising, seeing that there we have just walked the last component of nested symlink. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
Pull the block after the if-else in the end of what used to be do-while body into all branches there. We are almost done with the massage... Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
... it does nothing if nd->last_type is LAST_BIND. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
If we get ERR_PTR() from get_link(), we are guaranteed to get err != 0 when we break out of do-while, so we are going to hit if (err) return err; shortly after it. Pull that into the if (IS_ERR(s)) body. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
All remaining callers of the former are preceded by the latter Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
... and strip __always_inline from follow_link() - remaining callers don't need that. Now link_path_walk() recursion is a direct one. Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-
由 Al Viro 提交于
We used to need it to feed to follow_link(). No more... Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
-