Re: [PATCH] qnx4: do not interpret -EIO as a correct address

[Tong Zhang]

Thanks Anders!
I'm sending out another patch fixing other callers as suggested.
- Tong

On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 4:12 AM Anders Larsen <al@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Friday, 2020-10-23 23:16 Tong Zhang wrote:
> > qnx4_block_map() may return -EIO on funny qnx4 fs image, in this case do
> > not interpret -EIO as a correct address
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tong Zhang <ztong0001@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  fs/qnx4/inode.c | 2 ++
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/qnx4/inode.c b/fs/qnx4/inode.c
> > index e8da1cde87b9..d3a40c5b1a9a 100644
> > --- a/fs/qnx4/inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/qnx4/inode.c
> > @@ -59,6 +59,8 @@ static int qnx4_get_block( struct inode *inode, sector_t iblock, struct buffer_h
> >       QNX4DEBUG((KERN_INFO "qnx4: qnx4_get_block inode=[%ld] iblock=[%ld]\n",inode->i_ino,iblock));
> >
> >       phys = qnx4_block_map( inode, iblock );
> > +     if (phys == -EIO)
> > +             return -EIO;
> >       if ( phys ) {
> >               // logical block is before EOF
> >               map_bh(bh, inode->i_sb, phys);
>
> The fix looks sane to me, but how about the two other callers of
> qnx4_block_map(), are they not affected as well?
>
> Cheers
> Anders
>
>