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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 17 May 2017 17:37:44 -0500 From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@...eddedor.com> To: Chris Mason <clm@...com>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>, David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com> Cc: linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: [fs-btrfs] question about apparent useless function call Hello everybody, While looking into Coverity ID 1398149 I ran into the following piece of code at fs/btrfs/zlib.c:295: 295done: 296 zlib_inflateEnd(&workspace->strm); 297 if (data_in) 298 kunmap(pages_in[page_in_index]); 299 if (!ret) 300 zero_fill_bio(orig_bio); 301 return ret; 302} The issue here is that calling function zlib_inflateEnd() at line 296 _seems_ to be useless once this function _seems_ to be only useful for its return value, which is ignored. The same for line 388. Can someone help me understand what is the purpose of these calls? Should them be removed, or the return value actually evaluated? I'd really appreciate any comment on this. Thank you! -- Gustavo A. R. Silva
Powered by blists - more mailing lists