Re: [PATCH 6/6] vfs: introduce FMODE_NEG_OFFSET for allowingnegative f_pos

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 21:54:39 +0900
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > +static int
> > +__negative_fpos_check(struct file *file, loff_t pos, size_t count)
> > +{
> > +	/*
> > +	 * pos or pos+count is negative here, check overflow.
> > +	 * too big "count" will be caught in rw_verify_area().
> > +	 */
> > +	if ((pos < 0) && (pos + count < pos))
> > +		return -EOVERFLOW;
> > +	if (file->f_mode & FMODE_NEG_OFFSET)
> > +		return 0;
> > +	return -EINVAL;
> > +}
> > +
> >  /*
> >   * rw_verify_area doesn't like huge counts. We limit
> >   * them to something that fits in "int" so that others
> > @@ -222,8 +236,11 @@ int rw_verify_area(int read_write, struc
> >  	if (unlikely((ssize_t) count < 0))
> >  		return retval;
> >  	pos = *ppos;
> > -	if (unlikely((pos < 0) || (loff_t) (pos + count) < 0))
> > -		return retval;
> > +	if (unlikely((pos < 0) || (loff_t) (pos + count) < 0)) {
> > +		retval = __negative_fpos_check(file, pos, count);
> > +		if (retval)
> > +			return retval;
> > +	}
> >  
> >  	if (unlikely(inode->i_flock && mandatory_lock(inode))) {
> >  		retval = locks_mandatory_area(
> 
> Um... How do lseek() work? It sounds like to violate error code range.

This is for read-write. As far as I know, 
  - generic_file_llseek,
  - default_llseek
  - no_llseek

doesn't call this function. 

Thanks,
-Kame

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/