[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201027192229.GA22829@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 19:22:29 +0000
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] seq_file: fix clang warning for NULL pointer
arithmetic
> diff --git a/fs/kernfs/file.c b/fs/kernfs/file.c
> index f277d023ebcd..eafeb8bf4fe4 100644
> --- a/fs/kernfs/file.c
> +++ b/fs/kernfs/file.c
> @@ -121,10 +121,10 @@ static void *kernfs_seq_start(struct seq_file *sf, loff_t *ppos)
> return next;
> } else {
> /*
> - * The same behavior and code as single_open(). Returns
> - * !NULL if pos is at the beginning; otherwise, NULL.
> + * The same behavior and code as single_open(). Continues
> + * if pos is at the beginning; otherwise, EOF.
> */
> - return NULL + !*ppos;
> + return *ppos ? SEQ_OPEN_SINGLE : SEQ_OPEN_EOF;
Why the somewhat obsfucating unary expression instead of a good
old if?
e.g.
return next;
}
if (*ppos)
retun SEQ_OPEN_SINGLE;
return NULL;
> ++*ppos;
> - return NULL;
> + return SEQ_OPEN_EOF;
I don't think SEQ_OPEN_EOF is all that useful. NULL is the documented
end case already.
> diff --git a/include/linux/seq_file.h b/include/linux/seq_file.h
> index 813614d4b71f..26f0758b6551 100644
> --- a/include/linux/seq_file.h
> +++ b/include/linux/seq_file.h
> @@ -37,6 +37,9 @@ struct seq_operations {
>
> #define SEQ_SKIP 1
>
> +#define SEQ_OPEN_EOF (void *)0
> +#define SEQ_OPEN_SINGLE (void *)1
I think SEQ_OPEN_SINGLE also wants a comment documenting it.
AFAICS the reason for it is that ->start needs to return something
non-NULL for the seq_file code to make progress, and there is nothing
better for the single_open case.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists