linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 1/4] fs: send uevents for filesystem mount events

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <aUOQkY3s_D_REIsH@infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2025 21:26:41 -0800
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
Cc: brauner@...nel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] fs: send uevents for filesystem mount events

> +#define ADVANCE_ENV(envp, buf, buflen, written) \
> +	do { \
> +		ssize_t __written = (written); \
> +\
> +		WARN_ON((buflen) < (__written) + 1); \
> +		*(envp) = (buf); \
> +		(envp)++; \
> +		(buf) += (__written) + 1; \
> +		(buflen) -= (__written) + 1; \
> +	} while (0)

Any reason this is a macro vs an (inline?) function?  Looking at this a
bit more, could this simply use a seq_buf?