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]
Date:   Wed, 21 Sep 2016 10:50:38 +0200
From:   Nicolai Stange <nicstange@...il.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Eric Engestrom <eric.engestrom@...tec.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] debugfs: remove unused variable

Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> writes:

> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 05:17:15PM +0100, Eric Engestrom wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom <eric.engestrom@...tec.com>
>> ---
>>  fs/debugfs/file.c | 3 +--
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/fs/debugfs/file.c b/fs/debugfs/file.c
>> index 592059f..04eca0b 100644
>> --- a/fs/debugfs/file.c
>> +++ b/fs/debugfs/file.c
>> @@ -195,7 +195,6 @@ static int full_proxy_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
>>  	const struct dentry *dentry = F_DENTRY(filp);
>>  	const struct file_operations *real_fops = REAL_FOPS_DEREF(dentry);
>>  	const struct file_operations *proxy_fops = filp->f_op;
>> -	int r = 0;
>>  
>>  	/*
>>  	 * We must not protect this against removal races here: the
>> @@ -204,7 +203,7 @@ static int full_proxy_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
>>  	 * ->i_private is still being meaningful here.
>>  	 */
>>  	if (real_fops->release)
>> -		r = real_fops->release(inode, filp);
>> +		real_fops->release(inode, filp);
>
> Hm, shouldn't we be propagating the result back up the call chain?

AFAICS, the VFS layer doesn't ever evaluate the return value of
->release(), c.f. __fput() in fs/file_table.c .

OTOH, propagating that value back to caller also wouldn't hurt. But this
would be a matter of taste/coding style.


I can't remember whether I left this unused int r there on purpose. I
doubt not. Eric, did you run your patch through sparse and Coccinelle?

If so,

  Reviewed-by: Nicolai Stange <nicstange@...il.com>

for the diff. (This patch lacks a description though.)


Thanks,

Nicolai

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ