linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fat: Refactor shortname parsing

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: <1341240342.1695.20.camel@iscandar.digidescorp.com>
Date:	Mon, 02 Jul 2012 09:45:42 -0500
From:	"Steven J. Magnani" <steve@...idescorp.com>
To:	OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fat: Refactor shortname parsing

On Mon, 2012-07-02 at 23:36 +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote: 
> "Steven J. Magnani" <steve@...idescorp.com> writes:
> 
> > True, but with the change you suggest we lose the incrementing of 'i',
> > which likely would cause an infinite loop for 1:1 Unicode conversions.
> 
> You meant, we just have to do
> 
> 	if (!is_vfat)
>         	ptname[i] = ...;
> 	i++;
> 
> or something? I still feel this looks better to indicate, we don't use
> ptname in the case of vfat.

I can change it, but there are other places in that function where
ptname is used that are not qualified with !is_vfat, so I don't know
whether this improves clarity or reduces it.

I do think fat_tolower() should not be making decisions. IMHO the
trigraph and a comment, perhaps before the vfat-only reassignment of
'name', would be clearer. 

Steve

--
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/