Sasha, On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 02:52:15PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: > On 09/14/2012 04:58 PM, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 01:55:55PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 01:54:34PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote: > >>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:35:54PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: > >>>> Prevent warnings generated by smatch due to unchecked dereference of > >>>> 'new_xattr' in __simple_xattr_set(). > >>> > >>> Isn't this an actual bug w/ or w/o smatch? Remove request (NULL > >>> @value) w/o XATTR_REPLACE for an non-existent node would end up > >>> calling list_add() on NULL, right? If so, please collapse these two > >>> patches and mention the actual bug instead of smatch warning. > >> > >> And can somebody please make that function less confusing? - > >> restructuring / commenting whatever. It's doing something simple. > >> It's not supposed to be this confusing. > > > > I'll work on that. > > > > As it's still happening in linux-next, should I send a simple patch to fix it > along > with Tejun's comments? Or is the rewrite of __simple_xattr_set() behind the > corner?
the problem isn't because of the way __simple_xattr_set(), but because the fix took another route and wasn't present when you hit it last. -- Aristeu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
