| Message ID | 20220722142916.29435-2-tiwai@suse.de (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | exfat: Fixes for ENAMETOOLONG error handling | expand |
diff --git a/fs/exfat/namei.c b/fs/exfat/namei.c index c6eaf7e9ea74..bcb6445eb3b3 100644 --- a/fs/exfat/namei.c +++ b/fs/exfat/namei.c @@ -462,7 +462,7 @@ static int __exfat_resolve_path(struct inode *inode, const unsigned char *path, return namelen; /* return error value */ if ((lossy && !lookup) || !namelen) - return -EINVAL; + return (lossy & NLS_NAME_OVERLEN) ? -ENAMETOOLONG : -EINVAL; exfat_chain_set(p_dir, ei->start_clu, EXFAT_B_TO_CLU(i_size_read(inode), sbi), ei->flags);
LTP has a test for oversized file path renames and it expects the return value to be ENAMETOOLONG. However, exfat returns EINVAL unexpectedly in some cases, hence LTP test fails. The further investigation indicated that the problem happens only when iocharset isn't set to utf8. The difference comes from that, in the case of utf8, exfat_utf8_to_utf16() returns the error -ENAMETOOLONG directly and it's treated as the final error code. Meanwhile, on other iocharsets, exfat_nls_to_ucs2() returns the max path size but it sets NLS_NAME_OVERLEN to lossy flag instead; the caller side checks only whether lossy flag is set or not, resulting in always -EINVAL unconditionally. This patch aligns the return code for both cases by checking the lossy flag bit and returning ENAMETOOLONG when NLS_NAME_OVERLEN bit is set. BugLink: https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1201725 Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> --- fs/exfat/namei.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)