linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] ext4: remove set but rewrite variables

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]

Message-ID: <c3e07a98-7eff-c761-4a99-78b8c5b73f7d@huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 17 May 2021 16:44:18 +0800
From:   "tiantao (H)" <tiantao6@...wei.com>
To:     Благодаренко Артём 
        <artem.blagodarenko@...il.com>, Tian Tao <tiantao6@...ilicon.com>
CC:     "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
        <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: remove set but rewrite variables


在 2021/5/17 16:05, Благодаренко Артём 写道:
>
>> On 17 May 2021, at 05:56, Tian Tao <tiantao6@...ilicon.com> wrote:
>>
>> In line 2500 of the ext4_dx_add_entry function, the at variable is
>> assigned but not used, and it is reassigned in line 2449, so delete
>> the assignment of the at variable in line 2500.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tian Tao <tiantao6@...ilicon.com>
>> ---
>> fs/ext4/namei.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/ext4/namei.c b/fs/ext4/namei.c
>> index afb9d05..18bbf15 100644
>> --- a/fs/ext4/namei.c
>> +++ b/fs/ext4/namei.c
>> @@ -2497,7 +2497,7 @@ static int ext4_dx_add_entry(handle_t *handle, struct ext4_filename *fname,
>>
>> 			/* Which index block gets the new entry? */
>> 			if (at - entries >= icount1) {
>> -				frame->at = at = at - entries - icount1 + entries2;
>> +				frame->at = at - entries - icount1 + entries2;
>> 				frame->entries = entries = entries2;
>> 				swap(frame->bh, bh2);
>> 			}
>> -- 
>> 2.7.4
>>
>
> Hello Tian,
>
> Thank you for the patch.
>
> Please, clarify, do you think the logic not changed after you patch if "while (frame > frames) {“ loop is not executed or terminated by “break:” in " if (dx_get_count((frame - 1)->entries) < ...“ block?

yes, it's reported by svace. and I check the code it's not change the 
logic. myabe I was wrong:-P

> Also I am not sure code lines numbers in the description are useful for future readers, because they can be changed.
I can update the commit message at v2.
>
> Thank you..
>