Hi,
On 21/07/2025 22:38, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
In case of ovl_lookup_temp() failure, we currently print `err`
which is actually not initialized at all.
Instead, properly print PTR_ERR(whiteout) which is where the
actual error really is.
Address-Coverity-ID: 1647983 ("Uninitialized variables (UNINIT)")
Fixes: 8afa0a7367138 ("ovl: narrow locking in ovl_whiteout()")
Signed-off-by: Antonio Quartulli <antonio@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/overlayfs/dir.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/dir.c b/fs/overlayfs/dir.c
index 30619777f0f6..70b8687dc45e 100644
--- a/fs/overlayfs/dir.c
+++ b/fs/overlayfs/dir.c
@@ -117,8 +117,9 @@ static struct dentry *ovl_whiteout(struct ovl_fs *ofs)
if (!IS_ERR(whiteout))
return whiteout;
if (PTR_ERR(whiteout) != -EMLINK) {
- pr_warn("Failed to link whiteout - disabling whiteout inode sharing(nlink=%u, err=%i)\n",
- ofs->whiteout->d_inode->i_nlink, err);
+ pr_warn("Failed to link whiteout - disabling whiteout inode sharing(nlink=%u, err=%lu)\n",
while re-reading this patch, I realized that the format string for
PTR_ERR(..) was supposed to be %ld, not %lu...
Sorry about that :(
Neil should I send yet another patch or maybe this can be sneaked into
another change you are about to send?
Regards,
+ ofs->whiteout->d_inode->i_nlink,
+ PTR_ERR(whiteout));
ofs->no_shared_whiteout = true;
}
}
--
Antonio Quartulli
CEO and Co-Founder
Mandelbit Srl
https://www.mandelbit.com
