linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MD-RAID: Use seq_putc() in three status functions

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 16 Oct 2016 18:58:22 +0200
From:   Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
To:     SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
        linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Guoqing Jiang <gqjiang@...e.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>,
        Joe Perches <coupons@...ches.com>,
        Mike Christie <mchristi@...hat.com>,
        Neil Brown <neilb@...e.com>, Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>,
        Tomasz Majchrzak <tomasz.majchrzak@...el.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MD-RAID: Use seq_putc() in three status functions

On 10/16/2016 10:20 AM, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
> Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 10:10:28 +0200
>
> A single character (a closing square bracket) should be put into a sequence
> at the end in these functions.
> Thus use the corresponding function "seq_putc".
>
> This issue was detected also by using the Coccinelle software.
>
> Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
> ---
>  drivers/md/raid1.c  | 2 +-
>  drivers/md/raid10.c | 2 +-
>  drivers/md/raid5.c  | 2 +-
>  3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/md/raid1.c b/drivers/md/raid1.c
> index 1961d82..fd97f65 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/raid1.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/raid1.c
> @@ -1418,7 +1418,7 @@ static void raid1_status(struct seq_file *seq, struct mddev *mddev)
>  			   rdev && test_bit(In_sync, &rdev->flags) ? "U" : "_");
>  	}
>  	rcu_read_unlock();
> -	seq_printf(seq, "]");
> +	seq_putc(seq, ']');
>  }
>
>  static void raid1_error(struct mddev *mddev, struct md_rdev *rdev)
> diff --git a/drivers/md/raid10.c b/drivers/md/raid10.c
> index be1a9fc..7490b28 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/raid10.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/raid10.c
> @@ -1499,7 +1499,7 @@ static void raid10_status(struct seq_file *seq, struct mddev *mddev)
>  		seq_printf(seq, "%s", rdev && test_bit(In_sync, &rdev->flags) ? "U" : "_");
>  	}
>  	rcu_read_unlock();
> -	seq_printf(seq, "]");
> +	seq_putc(seq, ']');
>  }
>
>  /* check if there are enough drives for
> diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5.c b/drivers/md/raid5.c
> index 92ac251..9eb45c4 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/raid5.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/raid5.c
> @@ -7077,7 +7077,7 @@ static void raid5_status(struct seq_file *seq, struct mddev *mddev)
>  		seq_printf (seq, "%s", rdev && test_bit(In_sync, &rdev->flags) ? "U" : "_");
>  	}
>  	rcu_read_unlock();
> -	seq_printf (seq, "]");
> +	seq_putc(seq, ']');
>  }
>
>  static void print_raid5_conf (struct r5conf *conf)
>
The point of this patch being ... what?
Does it improve code? Does it improve anything?

Cheers,

Hannes
-- 
Dr. Hannes Reinecke		      zSeries & Storage
hare@...e.de			      +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: J. Hawn, J. Guild, F. Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)