Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1224499 > unrolled thread

[PATCH 06/19] staging/lustre/lmv: fix potential null pointer dereference

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  [PATCH 06/19] staging/lustre/lmv: fix potential null pointer dereference green@linuxhacker.ru - 2015-09-15 00:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 06/19] staging/lustre/lmv: fix potential null pointer  dereference Trevor Woerner <twoerner@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 15:30 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 06/19] staging/lustre/lmv: fix potential null pointer dereference Oleg Drokin <green@linuxhacker.ru> - 2015-09-15 16:00 +0200

#1224499 — [PATCH 06/19] staging/lustre/lmv: fix potential null pointer dereference

From: Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@intel.com>

In lmv_disconnect_mdc do procfs removal only if we actually know the name.

Reviewed-on: http://review.whamcloud.com/14605
Intel-bug-id: https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU-6517
Reviewed-by: James Simmons <uja.ornl@yahoo.com>
Reviewed-by: John L. Hammond <john.hammond@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Dmitry Eremin <dmitry.eremin@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@intel.com>
---
 drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lmv/lmv_obd.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lmv/lmv_obd.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lmv/lmv_obd.c
index 0fc0b61..cebbacf 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lmv/lmv_obd.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lmv/lmv_obd.c
@@ -593,11 +593,11 @@ static int lmv_disconnect_mdc(struct obd_device *obd, struct lmv_tgt_desc *tgt)
 		mdc_obd->obd_force = obd->obd_force;
 		mdc_obd->obd_fail = obd->obd_fail;
 		mdc_obd->obd_no_recov = obd->obd_no_recov;
-	}
 
-	if (lmv->lmv_tgts_kobj)
-		sysfs_remove_link(lmv->lmv_tgts_kobj,
-				  mdc_obd->obd_name);
+		if (lmv->lmv_tgts_kobj)
+			sysfs_remove_link(lmv->lmv_tgts_kobj,
+					  mdc_obd->obd_name);
+	}
 
 	rc = obd_fid_fini(tgt->ltd_exp->exp_obd);
 	if (rc)
-- 
2.1.0

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1225097 — Re: [PATCH 06/19] staging/lustre/lmv: fix potential null pointer dereference

On 09/14/15 18:41, green@linuxhacker.ru wrote:
> Reviewed-on: http://review.whamcloud.com/14605

I'm confused why the patch found in this email doesn't match the patch I
find when I click on the above link? Some of the patches in this series
match what I find on your jenkins URLs, and some do not.

For example, the function call in the body of the "if" below is
"sysfs_remove_link()" but the function call in the "if" body of the code
I find at http://review.whamcloud.com/14605 after clicking on the
"lustre/lmv/lmv_obd.c" link is "lprocfs_remove_proc_entry()".

Maybe I'm not using your jenkins correctly?

> Intel-bug-id: https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU-6517
> Reviewed-by: James Simmons <uja.ornl@yahoo.com>
> Reviewed-by: John L. Hammond <john.hammond@intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Eremin <dmitry.eremin@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lmv/lmv_obd.c | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lmv/lmv_obd.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lmv/lmv_obd.c
> index 0fc0b61..cebbacf 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lmv/lmv_obd.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lmv/lmv_obd.c
> @@ -593,11 +593,11 @@ static int lmv_disconnect_mdc(struct obd_device *obd, struct lmv_tgt_desc *tgt)
>  		mdc_obd->obd_force = obd->obd_force;
>  		mdc_obd->obd_fail = obd->obd_fail;
>  		mdc_obd->obd_no_recov = obd->obd_no_recov;
> -	}
>  
> -	if (lmv->lmv_tgts_kobj)
> -		sysfs_remove_link(lmv->lmv_tgts_kobj,
> -				  mdc_obd->obd_name);
> +		if (lmv->lmv_tgts_kobj)
> +			sysfs_remove_link(lmv->lmv_tgts_kobj,
> +					  mdc_obd->obd_name);
> +	}
>  
>  	rc = obd_fid_fini(tgt->ltd_exp->exp_obd);
>  	if (rc)

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1225130

Hello!

On Sep 15, 2015, at 9:26 AM, Trevor Woerner wrote:

> On 09/14/15 18:41, green@linuxhacker.ru wrote:
>> Reviewed-on: http://review.whamcloud.com/14605
> 
> I'm confused why the patch found in this email doesn't match the patch I
> find when I click on the above link? Some of the patches in this series
> match what I find on your jenkins URLs, and some do not.
> 
> For example, the function call in the body of the "if" below is
> "sysfs_remove_link()" but the function call in the "if" body of the code
> I find at http://review.whamcloud.com/14605 after clicking on the
> "lustre/lmv/lmv_obd.c" link is "lprocfs_remove_proc_entry()".
> 
> Maybe I'm not using your jenkins correctly?

You are using it correctly.

The patch is a "port" from one tree to another, but the pointer is to
the original patch. As the trees have diverged, various differences have accumulated.

The pointer is still useful to better be able to see which patches were already
included and which were not yet.

Bye,
    Oleg--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web