linux-kernel - Re: [nameidata 1/2] Don't pass NULL nameidata to vfs

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: <20070416162530.GA12207@parisc-linux.org>
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2007 10:25:30 -0600
From:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
To:	Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...e.de>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, jjohansen@...e.de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, chrisw@...s-sol.org,
	Tony Jones <tonyj@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [nameidata 1/2] Don't pass NULL nameidata to vfs_create

On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 06:11:30PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> +static inline int
> +nfsd_do_create(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *child, struct vfsmount *mnt,
> +	       int mode)
> +{
> +	struct nameidata nd = {
> +		.dentry = child,
> +		.mnt = mnt,
> +	};
> +
> +	return vfs_create(dir, child, mode, &nd);
> +}
> +

Wouldn't it normally result in fewer instructions (on most architectures
... maybe not x86) to keep the same argument order as vfs_create?  ie:

static inline int nfsd_do_create(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *child,
				 int mode, struct vfsmount *mnt)

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/