[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [gobo-l]Re: [PATCH] gobohide: avoid null pointer accesses

Lucas Correia Villa Real wrote:
> Oops, sorry. 2.4.20 and/or 2.4.21.

Ok, things are much clearer now :)

But I still have some doubts..CC'ing LKML to see if any of those
hackers can help us.

> int vfs_unlink(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry)
> {
> ...
> down(&dir->i_zombie);
> error = may_delete(dir, dentry, 0);
> if (!error) {
> ...
> if (!error) {
> if (dentry->d_inode && S_ISLNK (dentry->d_inode->i_mode))
> if (gobolinux_hide(dentry->d_inode->i_ino) > 0)
> gobolinux_inode_del(dentry->d_inode->i_ino)

Yeah, ok...but I still don't get when a dentry doesn't have a valid
d_inode why we don't return ENOENT like in sys_unlink:

error = !dentry->d_inode ? -ENOENT :
S_ISDIR(dentry->d_inode->i_mode) ? -EISDIR : -ENOTDIR;

Which, by the way, would be called _instead_ of calling
should we assume that the dentry _should_ have a valid dinode?

You said that the kernel oops'ed when unlinking a symlink in a NFS
partition, right?

Does anybody know if, in this case (a symlink inside a NFS partition),
the dentry really doesn't have a valid d_inode entry?


It's most certainly GNU/Linux, not Linux.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:47    [W:0.028 / U:4.784 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site