Commit da1b001a authored by Linus Torvalds's avatar Linus Torvalds

Merge branch 'for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/viro/vfs-2.6

* 'for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/viro/vfs-2.6:
  fix loop checks in d_materialise_unique()
  Fix ->d_lock locking order in unlazy_walk()
parents df8d6fe9 18367501
......@@ -2213,14 +2213,15 @@ static void dentry_unlock_parents_for_move(struct dentry *dentry,
* The hash value has to match the hash queue that the dentry is on..
*/
/*
* d_move - move a dentry
* __d_move - move a dentry
* @dentry: entry to move
* @target: new dentry
*
* Update the dcache to reflect the move of a file name. Negative
* dcache entries should not be moved in this way.
* dcache entries should not be moved in this way. Caller hold
* rename_lock.
*/
void d_move(struct dentry * dentry, struct dentry * target)
static void __d_move(struct dentry * dentry, struct dentry * target)
{
if (!dentry->d_inode)
printk(KERN_WARNING "VFS: moving negative dcache entry\n");
......@@ -2228,8 +2229,6 @@ void d_move(struct dentry * dentry, struct dentry * target)
BUG_ON(d_ancestor(dentry, target));
BUG_ON(d_ancestor(target, dentry));
write_seqlock(&rename_lock);
dentry_lock_for_move(dentry, target);
write_seqcount_begin(&dentry->d_seq);
......@@ -2275,6 +2274,20 @@ void d_move(struct dentry * dentry, struct dentry * target)
spin_unlock(&target->d_lock);
fsnotify_d_move(dentry);
spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
}
/*
* d_move - move a dentry
* @dentry: entry to move
* @target: new dentry
*
* Update the dcache to reflect the move of a file name. Negative
* dcache entries should not be moved in this way.
*/
void d_move(struct dentry *dentry, struct dentry *target)
{
write_seqlock(&rename_lock);
__d_move(dentry, target);
write_sequnlock(&rename_lock);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(d_move);
......@@ -2302,7 +2315,7 @@ struct dentry *d_ancestor(struct dentry *p1, struct dentry *p2)
* This helper attempts to cope with remotely renamed directories
*
* It assumes that the caller is already holding
* dentry->d_parent->d_inode->i_mutex and the inode->i_lock
* dentry->d_parent->d_inode->i_mutex, inode->i_lock and rename_lock
*
* Note: If ever the locking in lock_rename() changes, then please
* remember to update this too...
......@@ -2317,11 +2330,6 @@ static struct dentry *__d_unalias(struct inode *inode,
if (alias->d_parent == dentry->d_parent)
goto out_unalias;
/* Check for loops */
ret = ERR_PTR(-ELOOP);
if (d_ancestor(alias, dentry))
goto out_err;
/* See lock_rename() */
ret = ERR_PTR(-EBUSY);
if (!mutex_trylock(&dentry->d_sb->s_vfs_rename_mutex))
......@@ -2331,7 +2339,7 @@ static struct dentry *__d_unalias(struct inode *inode,
goto out_err;
m2 = &alias->d_parent->d_inode->i_mutex;
out_unalias:
d_move(alias, dentry);
__d_move(alias, dentry);
ret = alias;
out_err:
spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
......@@ -2416,15 +2424,24 @@ struct dentry *d_materialise_unique(struct dentry *dentry, struct inode *inode)
alias = __d_find_alias(inode, 0);
if (alias) {
actual = alias;
/* Is this an anonymous mountpoint that we could splice
* into our tree? */
if (IS_ROOT(alias)) {
write_seqlock(&rename_lock);
if (d_ancestor(alias, dentry)) {
/* Check for loops */
actual = ERR_PTR(-ELOOP);
} else if (IS_ROOT(alias)) {
/* Is this an anonymous mountpoint that we
* could splice into our tree? */
__d_materialise_dentry(dentry, alias);
write_sequnlock(&rename_lock);
__d_drop(alias);
goto found;
} else {
/* Nope, but we must(!) avoid directory
* aliasing */
actual = __d_unalias(inode, dentry, alias);
}
/* Nope, but we must(!) avoid directory aliasing */
actual = __d_unalias(inode, dentry, alias);
write_sequnlock(&rename_lock);
if (IS_ERR(actual))
dput(alias);
goto out_nolock;
......
......@@ -433,6 +433,8 @@ static int unlazy_walk(struct nameidata *nd, struct dentry *dentry)
goto err_parent;
BUG_ON(nd->inode != parent->d_inode);
} else {
if (dentry->d_parent != parent)
goto err_parent;
spin_lock_nested(&dentry->d_lock, DENTRY_D_LOCK_NESTED);
if (!__d_rcu_to_refcount(dentry, nd->seq))
goto err_child;
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment