Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Fri, 13 Mar 2009 18:11:01 -0700 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | [patch 084/114] pipe_rdwr_fasync: fix the error handling to prevent the leak/crash |
| |
2.6.28-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
------------------
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
commit e5bc49ba7439b9726006d031d440cba96819f0f8 upstream.
If the second fasync_helper() fails, pipe_rdwr_fasync() returns the error but leaves the file on ->fasync_readers.
This was always wrong, but since 233e70f4228e78eb2f80dc6650f65d3ae3dbf17c "saner FASYNC handling on file close" we have the new problem. Because in this case setfl() doesn't set FASYNC bit, __fput() will not do ->fasync(0), and we leak fasync_struct with ->fa_file pointing to the freed file.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> Cc: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
--- fs/pipe.c | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--- a/fs/pipe.c +++ b/fs/pipe.c @@ -699,12 +699,12 @@ pipe_rdwr_fasync(int fd, struct file *fi int retval; mutex_lock(&inode->i_mutex); - retval = fasync_helper(fd, filp, on, &pipe->fasync_readers); - - if (retval >= 0) + if (retval >= 0) { retval = fasync_helper(fd, filp, on, &pipe->fasync_writers); - + if (retval < 0) /* this can happen only if on == T */ + fasync_helper(-1, filp, 0, &pipe->fasync_readers); + } mutex_unlock(&inode->i_mutex); if (retval < 0)
| |