expose a low-level variant of fd_install() for binder

Similar situation to that of __alloc_fd(); do not use unless you
really have to.  You should not touch any descriptor table other
than your own; it's a sure sign of a really bad API design.

As with __alloc_fd(), you *must* use a first-class reference to
struct files_struct; something obtained by get_files_struct(some task)
(let alone direct task->files) will not do.  It must be either
current->files, or obtained by get_files_struct(current) by the
owner of that sucker and given to you.

Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

1 files changed, 14 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/fs/file.c b/fs/file.c
index 78cf88f2a0e..0d1bf051511 100644
--- a/fs/file.c
+++ b/fs/file.c
@@ -599,11 +599,18 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(put_unused_fd);
  *
  * It should never happen - if we allow dup2() do it, _really_ bad things
  * will follow.
+ *
+ * NOTE: __fd_install() variant is really, really low-level; don't
+ * use it unless you are forced to by truly lousy API shoved down
+ * your throat.  'files' *MUST* be either current->files or obtained
+ * by get_files_struct(current) done by whoever had given it to you,
+ * or really bad things will happen.  Normally you want to use
+ * fd_install() instead.
  */
 
-void fd_install(unsigned int fd, struct file *file)
+void __fd_install(struct files_struct *files, unsigned int fd,
+		struct file *file)
 {
-	struct files_struct *files = current->files;
 	struct fdtable *fdt;
 	spin_lock(&files->file_lock);
 	fdt = files_fdtable(files);
@@ -612,4 +619,9 @@ void fd_install(unsigned int fd, struct file *file)
 	spin_unlock(&files->file_lock);
 }
 
+void fd_install(unsigned int fd, struct file *file)
+{
+	__fd_install(current->files, fd, file);
+}
+
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(fd_install);