linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] btrfs: qgroup: Fix inconsistent IS_ERR and PTR

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: <56a9b4fa-7a5a-a8b0-d1d0-b8de217de9ce@embeddedor.com>
Date:   Thu, 31 Jan 2019 16:09:33 -0600
From:   "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
To:     dsterba@...e.cz, Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
        Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>,
        David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>, Qu Wenruo <wqu@...e.com>,
        linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs: qgroup: Fix inconsistent IS_ERR and PTR_ERR



On 1/31/19 5:49 AM, David Sterba wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 08:30:16PM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>> Fix inconsistent IS_ERR and PTR_ERR in btrfs_qgroup_trace_subtree_after_cow
>>
>> The proper pointer to be passed as argument is reloc_eb.
>>
>> This bug was detected with the help of Coccinelle.
>>
>> Fixes: 2b35a512e9cf ("btrfs: qgroup: Use delayed subtree rescan for balance")
>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
>> ---
>>  fs/btrfs/qgroup.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c
>> index 8559ed92d708..16d7ec8e4a06 100644
>> --- a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c
>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c
>> @@ -3931,7 +3931,7 @@ int btrfs_qgroup_trace_subtree_after_cow(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
>>  				   block->reloc_generation, block->level,
>>  				   &block->first_key);
>>  	if (IS_ERR(reloc_eb)) {
>> -		ret = PTR_ERR(subv_eb);
>> +		ret = PTR_ERR(reloc_eb);
> 
> Thanks, this was reported and fixed but the change has not propagated to
> for-next yet.
> 

Great. Good to know it is fixed now.

Thanks
--
Gustavo