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]
Date:   Tue, 19 Nov 2019 16:06:17 +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>,
        Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Sungjong Seo <sj1557.seo@...sung.com>,
        Valdis Klētnieks <valdis.kletnieks@...edu>,
        linkinjeon@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/13] exfat: add nls operations

…
> +++ b/fs/exfat/nls.c
…
> +static int exfat_load_upcase_table(struct super_block *sb,
> +		sector_t sector, unsigned long long num_sectors,
> +		unsigned int utbl_checksum)
> +{
…
> +error:
> +	if (bh)
> +		brelse(bh);

I am informed in the way that this function tolerates the passing
of null pointers.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/include/linux/buffer_head.h?id=af42d3466bdc8f39806b26f593604fdc54140bcb#n292
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.4-rc8/source/include/linux/buffer_head.h#L292

Thus I suggest to omit the extra pointer check also at similar places.

Can the label “release_bh” be more helpful?

Regards,
Markus

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ