[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5480742.m6jlgxS7AR@blindfold>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 22:22:16 +0200
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: David Oberhollenzer <goliath@...ma-star.at>
Cc: linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] libubigen: Maintain a eraseblock association table
Am Dienstag, 15. Mai 2018, 21:58:01 CEST schrieb David Oberhollenzer:
> On 05/14/2018 01:25 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> > @@ -229,6 +234,12 @@ int ubigen_write_volume(const struct ubigen_info *ui,
> > memset(outbuf + ui->data_offs + len, 0xFF,
> > ui->peb_size - ui->data_offs - len);
> >
> > + vi->eba[lnum] = lseek(out, 0, SEEK_CUR) / ui->peb_size;
> > + if (vi->eba[lnum] == -1) {
> > + sys_errmsg("cannot get offset of output file");
> > + goto out_free1;
> > + }
> > +
> > if (write(out, outbuf, ui->peb_size) != ui->peb_size) {
> > sys_errmsg("cannot write %d bytes to the output file", ui->peb_size);
> > goto out_free1;
>
> Wouldn't that division swallow errors? If I interpret the C99 draft correctly, dividing
> an lseek return value of -1 by ui->peb_size > 1 should result in 0.
Yep, that needs fixing.
Thanks,
//richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists