[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251029123702-c9ce0615570d0ab7902183ad-pchelkin@ispras>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2025 12:47:29 +0300
From: Fedor Pchelkin <pchelkin@...ras.ru>
To: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Cc: oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev,
Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>,
lvc-project@...uxtesting.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ext4: fix up copying of mount_opts in superblock
tuning ioctls
On Wed, 29. Oct 17:22, kernel test robot wrote:
> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
>
> In file included from <command-line>:
> >> ./usr/include/linux/ext4.h:141:30: error: expected ':', ',', ';', '}' or '__attribute__' before '__nonstring'
> 141 | __u8 mount_opts[64] __nonstring;
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~
That's my fault, apologies. HDRTEST was not in my build testing for
these patches due to mistake.
There should be '__kernel_nonstring', not '__nonstring'. The whole
annotation part is questionable though, maybe you think it's not needed at
all here?
Before sending out v2, I'll wait for the feedback on patch 2/2 - whether
the commit 8ecb790ea8c3 ("ext4: avoid potential buffer over-read in
parse_apply_sb_mount_options()") should be reverted or fixed with extra
memtostr() stuff like that patch proposes..?
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists