| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20130129144014.GE32246@quack.suse.cz> Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 15:40:14 +0100 From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> To: Wang Shilong <wangshilong1991@...il.com> Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Ext3: remove a useless check for the function ext3_free_blocks_sb On Mon 28-01-13 22:01:21, Wang Shilong wrote: > 于 2013-1-28 6:07, Jan Kara 写道: > > On Sat 26-01-13 14:58:31, Wang Shilong wrote: > >> From: Wang Shilong <wangsl-fnst@...fujitsu.com> > >> > >> Because 'block + count < block' always comes to false, it is useless > >> to have this check, just remove it. > > As Andreas commented, the test is actually correct. BTW any reason why > > you sent the patch three times? > My linux run in the virtual machine..and the clock is wrong...so i send the patch not clarified correctly > in marc.info..when i find it..I correct it, but first time i correct the time as 2012....how stupid it was..:-[ > so i send the patch three times...sorry to bother... > > BTW ， may i have a question.... > As we know the block to be freed can not be superblock and GDT.. > I don't see any check about it in ext2/ext3/ext4.... Yes, you are right we apparently don't check for superblock or GDT blocks. But checking for those will be a bit more complex and they are really scarce so I don't think it's worth the overhead. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> SUSE Labs, CR -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists