Bug 19270 - NFS file_lock have unititialized list_head structures.
NFS file_lock have unititialized list_head structures.
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: kernel (Show other bugs)
6.2
i386 Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Arjan van de Ven
Brian Brock
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2000-10-17 12:30 EDT by Thor Nolen
Modified: 2008-08-01 12:22 EDT (History)
0 users

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2004-09-30 11:38:50 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Thor Nolen 2000-10-17 12:30:39 EDT
The NFS lock routines (nlmsvc_lock, nlmsvc_testlock, and maybe others)
are being called with file_lock structures that contain uninitialized
list_head structs. (this as of 2.4.0-test7).

The "next" links should be circular chains, but are instead NULL.
This causes problems later when they are used.  I don't know where they
should be initialized, but a INIT_LIST_HEAD() should be done when these
file_lock structs are created.  For example, fl_wait.task_list not
being set shows itself when an NFS SETLK is followed by a GETLK.
The result is a dereference of the NULL pointer in locks_free_lock
when it tries the list_empty().

I opened another defect (#24) on a similar problem where
nlmsvc_lock calls nlmsvc_create_block to create a nlm_block struct
and then failed to init these circular chains.  The result was that
SETLKW operations resulted in the NULL pointer being used if the
request blocked.  This, however, now appears to be a much more
prevelant problem that is happening more than reported in defect #24.
Comment 1 Thor Nolen 2000-10-17 13:47:10 EDT
within this report 'defect #24' = bugzilla entry #19267
Comment 2 Bugzilla owner 2004-09-30 11:38:50 EDT
Thanks for the bug report. However, Red Hat no longer maintains this version of
the product. Please upgrade to the latest version and open a new bug if the problem
persists.

The Fedora Legacy project (http://fedoralegacy.org/) maintains some older releases, 
and if you believe this bug is interesting to them, please report the problem in
the bug tracker at: http://bugzilla.fedora.us/

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.