[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <44ad775e-3b6f-4cbc-ba6f-455ff7191c58@web.de>
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2019 10:30:44 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Navid Emamdoost <navid.emamdoost@...il.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Navid Emamdoost <emamd001@....edu>,
Stephen McCamant <smccaman@....edu>, Kangjie Lu <kjlu@....edu>,
David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@...il.com>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fs: affs: fix a memory leak in affs_remount
> The allocated memory for new_opts is only released if pare_options fail.
Can the following wording be nicer?
The allocated memory for the buffer “new_opts” will be released
only if a call of the function “parse_options” failed.
> The release for new_opts is added.
* How do you think about the change possibility to delete questionable
source code here?
* Would you like to complete the data processing for corresponding options
any more?
> -- fix a type in title, …
Please avoid typos also in your version comments.
> ---
I suggest to replace this second delimiter by a blank line.
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists