Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752750AbdLHHyi (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Dec 2017 02:54:38 -0500 Received: from mail-it0-f66.google.com ([209.85.214.66]:35949 "EHLO mail-it0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751021AbdLHHyg (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Dec 2017 02:54:36 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMbZGWKmr9zCVTxpzr9TjU/3mJbT5+C1hZtR3TQG32ywqgUwBCEMF8X2L0HsijJ/2+5BqfJ6aAVw/+FMxLWxnMk= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171207232603.GJ21978@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <1512687788-27172-1-git-send-email-gomonovych@gmail.com> <20171207232326.GI21978@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20171207232603.GJ21978@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> From: "Gomonovych, Vasyl" Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 08:54:34 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/seq_file: Fix warning of passing zero to 'PTR_ERR' To: Al Viro , willy@infradead.org Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by nfs id vB87sfii015442 Content-Length: 1456 Lines: 43 Hi, Guys sorry for this idiotic piece of code. Yesterday after doc seq_file.txt read I did not catch real way of work there. And made this shit. Sorry. Regards Vasyl On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 12:26 AM, Al Viro wrote: > On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 11:23:26PM +0000, Al Viro wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 12:03:07AM +0100, Vasyl Gomonovych wrote: >> > p could be NULL and passing into PTR_ERR >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Vasyl Gomonovych >> > --- >> > fs/seq_file.c | 4 ++-- >> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/fs/seq_file.c b/fs/seq_file.c >> > index 4be761c..8b700b9 100644 >> > --- a/fs/seq_file.c >> > +++ b/fs/seq_file.c >> > @@ -262,8 +262,8 @@ ssize_t seq_read(struct file *file, char __user *buf, size_t size, loff_t *ppos) >> > size_t offs = m->count; >> > loff_t next = pos; >> > p = m->op->next(m, p, &next); >> > - if (!p || IS_ERR(p)) { >> > - err = PTR_ERR(p); >> > + if (IS_ERR(p)) { >> > + err = (!p ? -EFAULT : PTR_ERR(p)); >> >> What does it fix, if I might ask? And while we are at it, would >> you mind explaining the reasoning behind that change? Or, say, >> testing done to it... > > While we are at it, where has that -EFAULT come from? And how > would it be ever reached, seeing that IS_ERR(NULL) is false? -- Доброї вам пори дня.