[PATCH] securityfs: Add missing d_delete() call on removal

Kees Cook keescook at chromium.org
Wed May 6 03:28:33 UTC 2020

On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 02:14:31AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 04:40:35PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > After using simple_unlink(), a call to d_delete() is needed in addition
> > to dput().
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org>
> > ---
> > Is this correct? I went looking around and there are a lot of variations
> > on the simple_unlink() pattern...
> > 
> > Many using explicit locking and combinations of d_drop(), __d_drop(), etc.
> Quite a few of those should switch to simple_recursive_removal().  As for
> securityfs...  d_drop() is _probably_ a saner variant, but looking at the
> callers of that thing... at least IMA ones seem to be garbage.

Hmm, I dunno. I hadn't looked at these yet. I'm not sure what's needed
for those cases.

Is my patch to add d_delete() correct, though? I'm trying to construct
the right set of calls for pstore's filesystem, and I noticed that most
will do simple_unlink(), d_delete(), dput(), but securityfs seemed to be
missing it.

Kees Cook

More information about the Linux-security-module-archive mailing list