From: Al Viro viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk
commit e72b9dd6a5f17d0fb51f16f8685f3004361e83d0 upstream.
lower_dentry can't go from positive to negative (we have it pinned), but it *can* go from negative to positive. So fetching ->d_inode into a local variable, doing a blocking allocation, checking that now ->d_inode is non-NULL and feeding the value we'd fetched earlier to a function that won't accept NULL is not a good idea.
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Al Viro viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
--- fs/ecryptfs/inode.c | 12 ++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/fs/ecryptfs/inode.c +++ b/fs/ecryptfs/inode.c @@ -311,7 +311,7 @@ static int ecryptfs_i_size_read(struct d static struct dentry *ecryptfs_lookup_interpose(struct dentry *dentry, struct dentry *lower_dentry) { - struct inode *inode, *lower_inode = d_inode(lower_dentry); + struct inode *inode, *lower_inode; struct ecryptfs_dentry_info *dentry_info; struct vfsmount *lower_mnt; int rc = 0; @@ -331,7 +331,15 @@ static struct dentry *ecryptfs_lookup_in dentry_info->lower_path.mnt = lower_mnt; dentry_info->lower_path.dentry = lower_dentry;
- if (d_really_is_negative(lower_dentry)) { + /* + * negative dentry can go positive under us here - its parent is not + * locked. That's OK and that could happen just as we return from + * ecryptfs_lookup() anyway. Just need to be careful and fetch + * ->d_inode only once - it's not stable here. + */ + lower_inode = READ_ONCE(lower_dentry->d_inode); + + if (!lower_inode) { /* We want to add because we couldn't find in lower */ d_add(dentry, NULL); return NULL;