Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Tue, 10 Feb 2009 11:01:03 -0800 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | [patch 38/53] seq_file: fix big-enough lseek() + read() |
| |
2.6.28-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know. ------------------
From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
commit f01d1d546abb2f4028b5299092f529eefb01253a upstream.
lseek() further than length of the file will leave stale ->index (second-to-last during iteration). Next seq_read() will not notice that ->f_pos is big enough to return 0, but will print last item as if ->f_pos is pointing to it.
Introduced in commit cb510b8172602a66467f3551b4be1911f5a7c8c2 aka "seq_file: more atomicity in traverse()".
Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
--- a/fs/seq_file.c +++ b/fs/seq_file.c @@ -102,6 +102,7 @@ static int traverse(struct seq_file *m, loff_t offset) p = m->op->next(m, p, &index); } m->op->stop(m, p); + m->index = index; return error; Eoverflow:
| |