From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-alpha-return-92855-listarch-libc-alpha=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 78441 invoked by alias); 1 Jun 2018 15:00:46 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 78352 invoked by uid 89); 1 Jun 2018 15:00:44 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=
X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix Linux fcntl OFD locks for non-LFS architectures
 (BZ#20251)
To: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>,
 libc-alpha@sourceware.org
References: <1522877210-27934-1-git-send-email-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <36d1d0db-8661-5476-7e42-1a7015f4c766@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2018 15:00:00 -0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1522877210-27934-1-git-send-email-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2018-06/txt/msg00009.txt.bz2

On 04/04/2018 11:26 PM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> @@ -59,16 +50,56 @@ __libc_fcntl (int fd, int cmd, ...)
>   
>     cmd = FCNTL_ADJUST_CMD (cmd);
>   
> -  if (cmd == F_SETLKW || cmd == F_SETLKW64)
> -    return SYSCALL_CANCEL (fcntl64, fd, cmd, (void *) arg);
> -
> -  return fcntl_common (fd, cmd, arg);
> +  switch (cmd)
> +    {
> +      case F_SETLKW:
> +	return SYSCALL_CANCEL (fcntl64, fd, cmd, arg);
> +      case F_GETLK64:
> +      case F_OFD_GETLK:
> +	{
> +	  struct flock *flk = (struct flock *) arg;
> +	  struct flock64 flk64 = flock_to_flock64 (flk);
> +	  int ret = SYSCALL_CANCEL (fcntl64, fd, cmd, &flk64);
> +	  if (ret == -1)
> +	    return -1;
> +	  flk->l_type = flk64.l_type;
> +	  flk->l_whence = flk64.l_whence;
> +	  flk->l_start = flk64.l_start;
> +	  flk->l_len = flk64.l_len;
> +	  flk->l_pid = flk64.l_pid;
> +	  return ret;

Doesn't this need an overflow check?

I think you should mention somewhere that this introduces new 
cancellation points.

Thanks,
Florian