On Tue 24-06-25 10:29:08, Christian Brauner wrote:
> Switch to a more common coding style.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/fhandle.c | 16 ++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/fhandle.c b/fs/fhandle.c
> index d8d32208c621..22edced83e4c 100644
> --- a/fs/fhandle.c
> +++ b/fs/fhandle.c
> @@ -170,18 +170,22 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE5(name_to_handle_at, int, dfd, const char __user *, name,
>
> static int get_path_anchor(int fd, struct path *root)
> {
> + if (fd >= 0) {
> + CLASS(fd, f)(fd);
> + if (fd_empty(f))
> + return -EBADF;
> + *root = fd_file(f)->f_path;
> + path_get(root);
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> if (fd == AT_FDCWD) {
> struct fs_struct *fs = current->fs;
> spin_lock(&fs->lock);
> *root = fs->pwd;
> path_get(root);
> spin_unlock(&fs->lock);
> - } else {
> - CLASS(fd, f)(fd);
> - if (fd_empty(f))
> - return -EBADF;
> - *root = fd_file(f)->f_path;
> - path_get(root);
> + return 0;
> }
This actually introduces a regression that when userspace passes invalid fd
< 0, we'd be returning 0 whereas previously we were returning -EBADF. I
think the return below should be switched to -EBADF to fix that.
> return 0;
>
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
