On 09/16/2016 10:52 AM, Greg Kurz wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 09:37:48 +0200
> Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>
>> On 09/16/2016 09:19 AM, Greg Kurz wrote:
>>> On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 01:05:11 +0200
>>> Greg Kurz wrote:
>>>
If the call to fid_to_qid() returns an error, we will call v9fs_path_free(
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 09:37:48 +0200
Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> On 09/16/2016 09:19 AM, Greg Kurz wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 01:05:11 +0200
> > Greg Kurz wrote:
> >
> >> If the call to fid_to_qid() returns an error, we will call v9fs_path_free()
> >> on uninitialized paths.
> >>
> >
> > I
On 09/16/2016 09:19 AM, Greg Kurz wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 01:05:11 +0200
> Greg Kurz wrote:
>
>> If the call to fid_to_qid() returns an error, we will call v9fs_path_free()
>> on uninitialized paths.
>>
>
> I'll add this to the changelog:
>
> It is a regression introduced by the following
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 01:05:11 +0200
Greg Kurz wrote:
> If the call to fid_to_qid() returns an error, we will call v9fs_path_free()
> on uninitialized paths.
>
I'll add this to the changelog:
It is a regression introduced by the following commit:
56f101ecce0e 9pfs: handle walk of ".." in the ro
If the call to fid_to_qid() returns an error, we will call v9fs_path_free()
on uninitialized paths.
Let's fix this by initializing dpath and path before calling fid_to_qid().
Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz
---
Thanks Paolo (and Coverity) for spotting this.
Cc'ing stable as this is a regression intro
