posix_acl: Add the check items
Subsystems (6)
v2 cover posix_acl: Add the check items
Hi all:
This patch is moving the acl check(Null pointer and PTR_ERR) into fs/posix_acl.c.
Thanks for Matthew Wilcox's sguuestion.
---
Signature · 7 lines
Best Regards, Liuwenyi _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list [email protected] http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
I like taking these checks into posix_acl_valid, but I think the patch submission needs a bit more work.
All the patches are extremly whitespace mangled. And I don't think splitting them up makes a whole lot of sense, when we do API changes like this we usually fix up all callers. So please try to fix your mailer, merged them all into one, and maybe also chose a more descriptive subject line, e.g.
Subject: take checks for NULL and error pointers into posix_acl_valid()
And btw, at least the XFS change seems incorrect - previously we returned NULL acl pointer and this patch changes it to -EINVAL.
I like taking these checks into posix_acl_valid, but I think the patch submission needs a bit more work.
All the patches are extremly whitespace mangled. And I don't think splitting them up makes a whole lot of sense, when we do API changes like this we usually fix up all callers. So please try to fix your mailer, merged them all into one, and maybe also chose a more descriptive subject line, e.g.
Subject: take checks for NULL and error pointers into posix_acl_valid()
And btw, at least the XFS change seems incorrect - previously we returned NULL acl pointer and this patch changes it to -EINVAL.
I like taking these checks into posix_acl_valid, but I think the patch submission needs a bit more work.
All the patches are extremly whitespace mangled. And I don't think splitting them up makes a whole lot of sense, when we do API changes like this we usually fix up all callers. So please try to fix your mailer, merged them all into one, and maybe also chose a more descriptive subject line, e.g.
Subject: take checks for NULL and error pointers into posix_acl_valid()
And btw, at least the XFS change seems incorrect - previously we returned NULL acl pointer and this patch changes it to -EINVAL.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
Thanks for your suggestion.
In my opinion the null point is a incorrect state for the acl, then I return -EINVAL.
I will check this state transition in XFS.
2009/12/21 Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>:
Quoted 9 lines
I like taking these checks into
posix_acl_valid, but I think the patch submission needs a bit more work.All the patches are extremly whitespace mangled. And I don't think splitting them up makes a whole lot of sense, when we do API changes like this we usually fix up all callers. So please try to fix your mailer, merged them all into one, and maybe also chose a more descriptive subject line, e.g.
Quoted 7 lines
Subject: take checks for NULL and error pointers into
posix_acl_valid()And btw, at least the XFS change seems incorrect - previously we returned NULL acl pointer and this patch changes it to
-EINVAL.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs