On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 01:57:10PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > > > On 07/11/2016 11:48 AM, David Sterba wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 09:43:09AM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > >> The code flow in btrfs_new_inode allows for btrfs_evict_inode to be > >> called with not fully initialised inode (e.g. ->root member not > >> being set). This can happen when btrfs_set_inode_index in > >> btrfs_new_inode fails, which in turn would call iput for the newly > >> allocated inode. This in turn leads to vfs calling into btrfs_evict_inode. > >> This leads to null pointer dereference. To handle this situation check whether > >> the passed inode has root set and just free it in case it doesn't. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov <kernel@xxxxxxxx> > >> Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@xxxxxx> > >> --- > >> fs/btrfs/inode.c | 9 ++++++++- > >> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> I belive this is fixes the issue reported in > >> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/57809 > > > > There's some time left before 4.7 release, so I'll send another pull > > request, including this patch. > > Now that I think about it, shouldn't this also be queued for stable as well? Yes. Marking patches with stable tags has been very inconsistent so we send patches to stable separately. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
