Revision 112fc894a7c49e6435f91faa1cebfd425e6f3ace authored by David Howells on 27 January 2015, 15:18:39 UTC, committed by Al Viro on 20 February 2015, 09:56:43 UTC
Code that does this: if (!(d_unhashed(dentry) && dentry->d_inode)) { ... simple_unlink(parent->d_inode, dentry); } is broken because: !(d_unhashed(dentry) && dentry->d_inode) is equivalent to: !d_unhashed(dentry) || !dentry->d_inode so it is possible to get into simple_unlink() with dentry->d_inode == NULL. simple_unlink(), however, assumes dentry->d_inode cannot be NULL. I think that what was meant is this: !d_unhashed(dentry) && dentry->d_inode and that the logical-not operator or the final close-bracket was misplaced. Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> cc: Joel Becker <joel.becker@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
1 parent a457ac2
File | Mode | Size |
---|---|---|
nsim_700_defconfig | -rw-r--r-- | 1.8 KB |
nsimosci_defconfig | -rw-r--r-- | 2.0 KB |
tb10x_defconfig | -rw-r--r-- | 3.1 KB |
![swh spinner](/static/img/swh-spinner.gif)
Computing file changes ...