[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20260116092833.GB21396@lst.de>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 10:28:33 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@...nel.org>
Cc: viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org, hch@....de, tytso@....edu,
willy@...radead.org, jack@...e.cz, djwong@...nel.org,
josef@...icpanda.com, sandeen@...deen.net, rgoldwyn@...e.com,
xiang@...nel.org, dsterba@...e.com, pali@...nel.org,
ebiggers@...nel.org, neil@...wn.name, amir73il@...il.com,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, cheol.lee@....com, jay.sim@....com,
gunho.lee@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 11/14] ntfs: update misc operations
On Sun, Jan 11, 2026 at 11:03:41PM +0900, Namjae Jeon wrote:
> + if ((data1_len != data2_len) || (data1_len <= 0) || (data1_len & 3)) {
Nit: all the inner braces are superfluous.
Also why allow passing negative values at all and not pass unsigned
length values?
> + ntfs_error(vol->sb, "data1_len or data2_len not valid\n");
> + return -1;
> + }
> +
> + p1 = (const __le32 *)data1;
> + p2 = (const __le32 *)data2;
> + len = data1_len;
I don't think any of these casts is needed. Also the variables could
easily be initialized at declaration time.
> + do {
> + d1 = le32_to_cpup(p1);
> + p1++;
> + d2 = le32_to_cpup(p2);
> + p2++;
> + } while ((d1 == d2) && ((len -= 4) > 0));
More superfluous races.
> + if (d1 < d2)
> + rc = -1;
>
> + else {
> + if (d1 == d2)
> + rc = 0;
> + else
> + rc = 1;
> + }
> + ntfs_debug("Done, returning %i.", rc);
> + return rc;
Just return directly using cmp_int() and skip the very verbose debugging?
return cmp_int(d1, d2);
> +/**
> + * ntfs_collate_file_name - Which of two filenames should be listed first
> + */
> +static int ntfs_collate_file_name(struct ntfs_volume *vol,
> + const void *data1, const int __always_unused data1_len,
> + const void *data2, const int __always_unused data2_len)
Do we need these annotations for indirectly called callbacks now?
> + if (cr != COLLATION_BINARY && cr != COLLATION_NTOFS_ULONG &&
> + cr != COLLATION_FILE_NAME && cr != COLLATION_NTOFS_ULONGS)
> + return -EINVAL;
Turn this into a switch to make it more obvious?
> +
> i = le32_to_cpu(cr);
> - BUG_ON(i < 0);
> + if (i < 0)
> + return -1;
> if (i <= 0x02)
> return ntfs_do_collate0x0[i](vol, data1, data1_len,
> data2, data2_len);
> - BUG_ON(i < 0x10);
> + if (i < 0x10)
> + return -1;
> i -= 0x10;
> if (likely(i <= 3))
> return ntfs_do_collate0x1[i](vol, data1, data1_len,
> data2, data2_len);
> - BUG();
.. and then maybe use the switch to untangle this as well, which
smells like just a bit too much deep magic..
> -void __ntfs_error(const char *function, const struct super_block *sb,
> +void __ntfs_error(const char *function, struct super_block *sb,
Why does this drop the const?
> +#ifndef DEBUG
> + if (sb)
> + pr_err_ratelimited("(device %s): %s(): %pV\n",
> + sb->s_id, flen ? function : "", &vaf);
> + else
> + pr_err_ratelimited("%s(): %pV\n", flen ? function : "", &vaf);
> +#else
> if (sb)
> pr_err("(device %s): %s(): %pV\n",
> sb->s_id, flen ? function : "", &vaf);
> else
> pr_err("%s(): %pV\n", flen ? function : "", &vaf);
> +#endif
Usually if you have cpp conditions with an else, I'd use ifdef instead
of the negated version.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists