[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e2c566f9-47e4-cfdc-ad4a-426ecdfb16e4@themaw.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 09:06:13 +0800
From: Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>
To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh@...plt.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
Carlos Maiolino <cmaiolino@...hat.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] vfs: parse: deal with zero length string value
On 29/6/22 01:55, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 08:30:52AM +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
>> Parsing an fs string that has zero length should result in the parameter
>> being set to NULL so that downstream processing handles it correctly.
>> For example, the proc mount table processing should print "(none)" in
>> this case to preserve mount record field count, but if the value points
>> to the NULL string this doesn't happen.
> Hmmm... And what happens if you feed that to ->parse_param(), which
> calls fs_parse(), which decides that param->key looks like a name of e.g.
> u32 option and calls fs_param_is_u32() to see what's what? OOPS is a form
> of rejection, I suppose, but...
Oh ... yes, would you be ok with an update that moves the
"param.type = fs_value_is_string;" inside the above else
clause?
Ian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists