[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2818727.1684779061@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2023 19:11:01 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Shyam Prasad N <nspmangalore@...il.com>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, Shyam Prasad N <sprasad@...rosoft.com>,
Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>,
Rohith Surabattula <rohiths.msft@...il.com>,
Paulo Alcantara <pc@...guebit.com>,
Tom Talpey <tom@...pey.com>, Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cifs: Fix cifs_limit_bvec_subset() to correctly check the maxmimum size
Shyam Prasad N <nspmangalore@...il.com> wrote:
> > + max_size -= len;
>
> Shouldn't this decrement happen below, after the span has been
> compared with max_size?
It probably doesn't matter. The compiler is free to move it around, but yes
that and ix++ can both be moved down.
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists