On Thu, 12 Mar 2026 21:09:52 +0000 Josh Law <[email protected]> wrote:
> > That's a fair point, Steve. Given that brace_index isn't touched elsewhere > > and the current check effectively prevents the overflow, I agree this isn't > > strictly necessary. I'll drop this patch and stick with the fix for the > > off-by-one reporting error instead. Thanks for the feedback! > > Wait Steve, > Thanks for the look. I see your point that it's currently redundant given the > call patterns. It looks like Andrew has already merged this into the -mm > tree, likely as a 'belt-and-suspenders' safety measure. I'll keep your > feedback in mind for future cleanup, but I'm glad we got the other off-by-one > fix in as well! Please wordwrap the emails. > And in my opinion, merging it is a decent idea. You've changed your position without explaining why?
