linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 6/8] fs: remove no

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: <YrcJKtZQLDvRgX7P@infradead.org>
Date:   Sat, 25 Jun 2022 06:10:02 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/8] fs: remove no_llseek

On Sat, Jun 25, 2022 at 01:01:13PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> Now that all callers of ->llseek are going through vfs_llseek(), we
> don't gain anything by keeping no_llseek around. Nothing compares it or
> calls it.

Shouldn't this and the checks for no_llseek simply be merged into patch
2?

> +	if ((file->f_mode & FMODE_LSEEK) && file->f_op->llseek)
> +		return file->f_op->llseek(file, offset, whence);
> +	return -ESPIPE;

No function change, but in general checking for the error condition
in the branch tends to be more readable.  i.e.:

	if (!(file->f_mode & FMODE_LSEEK) || !file->f_op->llseek)
		return -ESPIPE;
	return file->f_op->llseek(file, offset, whence);