linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] Corrected errno in minix_new

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <7oqmmmy2iku6lyg5tueioiox3hqfii2nffa3us3grwmznevggh@2c4puqjum4au>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2025 11:01:33 +0100
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: Jori Koolstra <jkoolstra@...all.nl>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, 
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>, Taotao Chen <chentaotao@...iglobal.com>, 
	Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Corrected errno in minix_new_inode

On Tue 25-11-25 22:34:28, Jori Koolstra wrote:
> 
> > 
> > OK, but this will make the compiler likely unhappy (because it doesn't know
> > s_imap_blocks cannot be 0) and generally the code will be less
> > self-containted. So in the spirit of defensive programming I'd leave the
> > assignment there.
> > 
> 
> OK, I see. I agree. Still should it then not be set where j is declared?

Could be but I don't think changing this is really worth the churn.

> But that is a very minor point. I am okay with removing that change.

While it is good to trim unnecessary context it is also good to leave in
the email the patch hunk we are speaking about because frankly I already
forgot the details and now have to go to lore to check old emails in this
thread to remind myself.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
SUSE Labs, CR