linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] fat: New macros to determine the FAT variant (32, 16 or 12)

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87efakcuaf.fsf@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Date:   Fri, 14 Dec 2018 18:49:28 +0900
From:   OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
To:     Tamir Carmeli <carmeli.tamir@...il.com>
Cc:     joe@...ches.com, jthumshirn@...e.de,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, axboe@...nel.dk,
        martin.petersen@...cle.com, bvanassche@....org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] fat: New macros to determine the FAT variant (32, 16 or 12)

Tamir Carmeli <carmeli.tamir@...il.com> writes:

> I just want to make sure, is there a reason why I shouldn't delete
> FAT_FIRST_ENT, as Joe Perches commented?

FAT_FIRST_ENT() was used to check if fat spec compliance. But in real
world, there are too many implementations that didn't follow spec.

Well, so, now FAT_FIRST_ENT() is pointed only from comment. The reason
is only for this comment.

Thanks.
-- 
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>