linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] OCFS2: remove useless err

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <f5c1b5cd-6fd2-f198-97e3-a4f34e990ba8@linux.alibaba.com>
Date:   Tue, 4 Feb 2020 18:59:01 +0800
From:   Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     Mark Fasheh <mark@...heh.com>, Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
        ChenGang <cg.chen@...wei.com>,
        Richard Fontana <rfontana@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] OCFS2: remove useless err



在 2020/1/26 上午9:52, Joseph Qi 写道:
> 

>>  
>> @@ -708,7 +708,7 @@ static struct buffer_head *ocfs2_find_entry_el(const char *name, int namelen,
>>  				num++;
>>  
>>  				bh = NULL;
>> -				err = ocfs2_read_dir_block(dir, b++, &bh,
>> +				ocfs2_read_dir_block(dir, b++, &bh,
>>  							   OCFS2_BH_READAHEAD);
> 
> Umm... missing error checking here?


/*
 * This function forces all errors to -EIO for consistency with its
 * predecessor, ocfs2_bread().  We haven't audited what returning the
 * real error codes would do to callers.  We log the real codes with
 * mlog_errno() before we squash them.
 */
static int ocfs2_read_dir_block(struct inode *inode, u64 v_block,
                                struct buffer_head **bh, int flags)

According to ocfs2_read_dir_block comments, caller don't care the err value, func will log it.

So is this patch ok? :)

Thanks
Alex