From: Greg KH on
2.6.32-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.


From: Sachin Prabhu <sprabhu(a)>

commit f78233dd44a110c574fe760ad6f9c1e8741a0d00 upstream.

While investigating a bug, I came across a possible bug in v9fs. The
problem is similar to the one reported for NFS by ASANO Masahiro in

v9fs_file_lock() will skip locks on file which has mode set to 02666.
This is a problem in cases where the mode of the file is changed after
a process has obtained a lock on the file. Such a lock will be skipped
during unlock and the machine will end up with a BUG in

v9fs_file_lock() should skip the check for mandatory locks when
unlocking a file.

Signed-off-by: Sachin Prabhu <sprabhu(a)>
Signed-off-by: Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh(a)>
Cc: maximilian attems <max(a)>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh(a)>

fs/9p/vfs_file.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/fs/9p/vfs_file.c
+++ b/fs/9p/vfs_file.c
@@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ static int v9fs_file_lock(struct file *f
P9_DPRINTK(P9_DEBUG_VFS, "filp: %p lock: %p\n", filp, fl);

/* No mandatory locks */
- if (__mandatory_lock(inode))
+ if (__mandatory_lock(inode) && fl->fl_type != F_UNLCK)
return -ENOLCK;

if ((IS_SETLK(cmd) || IS_SETLKW(cmd)) && fl->fl_type != F_UNLCK) {

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at