linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/13] exfat: add inode operations

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <82520012-9940-7f2b-3bac-bea5c2396ccd@web.de>
Date:   Sun, 17 Nov 2019 15:15:44 +0100
From:   Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:     Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@...sung.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Sungjong Seo <sj1557.seo@...sung.com>,
        Valdis Klētnieks <valdis.kletnieks@...edu>,
        linkinjeon@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/13] exfat: add inode operations

…
> +++ b/fs/exfat/inode.c
…
> +static int exfat_create(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode,
> +		bool excl)
> +{
…
+out:
+	mutex_unlock(&EXFAT_SB(sb)->s_lock);

Can the label “unlock” be more appropriate?


> +static struct dentry *exfat_lookup(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
> +		unsigned int flags)
> +{
…
> +error:
> +	mutex_unlock(&EXFAT_SB(sb)->s_lock);

Would you like to use the label “unlock” also at this place (and similar ones)?


> +static int exfat_search_empty_slot(struct super_block *sb,
> +		struct exfat_hint_femp *hint_femp, struct exfat_chain *p_dir,
> +		int num_entries)
> +{
…
> +out:
> +	kfree(clu);

How do you think about to rename the label to “free_clu”?

Regards,
Markus