All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
diff for duplicates of <00bb01d59dcd$4b1791b0$e146b510$@samsung.com>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index 18426f7..9eec2f9 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -1,94 +1,94 @@
-> …
-> > +++ b/fs/exfat/super.c
-> …
-> > +static int exfat_show_options(struct seq_file *m, struct dentry *root)
-> > +{
-> …
-> > +	seq_printf(m, ",fmask=%04o", opts->fs_fmask);
-> > +	seq_printf(m, ",dmask=%04o", opts->fs_dmask);
-> 
-> How do you think about to combine these two function calls into a single one?
-> 
-> 
-> > +static int __exfat_fill_super(struct super_block *sb)
-> > +{
-> …
-> > +		exfat_msg(sb, KERN_ERR, "unable to read boot sector");
-> > +		ret = -EIO;
-> > +		goto out;
-> …
-> 
-> Would you like to simplify this place?
-> 
-> +		return -EIO;
-> 
-> 
-> …
-> > +		exfat_msg(sb, KERN_ERR, "failed to load upcase table");
-> > +		goto out;
-> 
-> Would you like to omit this label?
-> 
-> +		return ret;
-> 
-> 
-> > +static int exfat_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, struct fs_context *fc)
-> > +{
-> …
-> > +		exfat_msg(sb, KERN_ERR, "failed to recognize exfat type");
-> > +		goto failed_mount;
-> 
-> The local variable “root_inode” contains still a null pointer at this place.
-> 
-> * Thus I would find a jump target like “reset_s_root” more appropriate.
-> 
-> * Can the corresponding pointer initialisation be omitted then?
-> 
-> 
-> …
-> > +failed_mount:
-> > +	if (root_inode)
-> > +		iput(root_inode);
-> …
-> 
-> I am informed in the way that this function tolerates the passing
-> of null pointers.
-> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/i
-> node.c?id=1d4c79ed324ad780cfc3ad38364ba1fd585dd2a8#n1567
-> https://protect2.fireeye.com/url?k=34e5568f-697957ef-34e4ddc0-0cc47a31307c-
-> 7f9b30869a6ffaa4&u=https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.4-
-> rc7/source/fs/inode.c#L1567
-> 
-> Thus I suggest to omit the extra pointer check also at this place.
-> 
-> 
-> > +static int __init init_exfat_fs(void)
-> > +{
-> …
-> +	err = exfat_cache_init();
-> +	if (err)
-> +		goto error;
-> 
-> Can it be nicer to return directly?
-> 
-> 
-> …
-> > +	if (!exfat_inode_cachep)
-> > +		goto error;
-> 
-> Can an other jump target like “shutdown_cache” be more appropriate?
-> 
-> 
-> > +	err = register_filesystem(&exfat_fs_type);
-> > +	if (err)
-> > +		goto error;
-> …
-> 
-> Can the label “destroy_cache” be more appropriate?
-> 
-> 
-I checked your all points, Will fix them on V2.
-Thanks for your review!
-
-> Regards,
+> …\r
+> > +++ b/fs/exfat/super.c\r
+> …\r
+> > +static int exfat_show_options(struct seq_file *m, struct dentry *root)\r
+> > +{\r
+> …\r
+> > +	seq_printf(m, ",fmask=%04o", opts->fs_fmask);\r
+> > +	seq_printf(m, ",dmask=%04o", opts->fs_dmask);\r
+> \r
+> How do you think about to combine these two function calls into a single one?\r
+> \r
+> \r
+> > +static int __exfat_fill_super(struct super_block *sb)\r
+> > +{\r
+> …\r
+> > +		exfat_msg(sb, KERN_ERR, "unable to read boot sector");\r
+> > +		ret = -EIO;\r
+> > +		goto out;\r
+> …\r
+> \r
+> Would you like to simplify this place?\r
+> \r
+> +		return -EIO;\r
+> \r
+> \r
+> …\r
+> > +		exfat_msg(sb, KERN_ERR, "failed to load upcase table");\r
+> > +		goto out;\r
+> \r
+> Would you like to omit this label?\r
+> \r
+> +		return ret;\r
+> \r
+> \r
+> > +static int exfat_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, struct fs_context *fc)\r
+> > +{\r
+> …\r
+> > +		exfat_msg(sb, KERN_ERR, "failed to recognize exfat type");\r
+> > +		goto failed_mount;\r
+> \r
+> The local variable “root_inode” contains still a null pointer at this place.\r
+> \r
+> * Thus I would find a jump target like “reset_s_root” more appropriate.\r
+> \r
+> * Can the corresponding pointer initialisation be omitted then?\r
+> \r
+> \r
+> …\r
+> > +failed_mount:\r
+> > +	if (root_inode)\r
+> > +		iput(root_inode);\r
+> …\r
+> \r
+> I am informed in the way that this function tolerates the passing\r
+> of null pointers.\r
+> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/i\r
+> node.c?id=1d4c79ed324ad780cfc3ad38364ba1fd585dd2a8#n1567\r
+> https://protect2.fireeye.com/url?k=34e5568f-697957ef-34e4ddc0-0cc47a31307c-\r
+> 7f9b30869a6ffaa4&u=https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.4-\r
+> rc7/source/fs/inode.c#L1567\r
+> \r
+> Thus I suggest to omit the extra pointer check also at this place.\r
+> \r
+> \r
+> > +static int __init init_exfat_fs(void)\r
+> > +{\r
+> …\r
+> +	err = exfat_cache_init();\r
+> +	if (err)\r
+> +		goto error;\r
+> \r
+> Can it be nicer to return directly?\r
+> \r
+> \r
+> …\r
+> > +	if (!exfat_inode_cachep)\r
+> > +		goto error;\r
+> \r
+> Can an other jump target like “shutdown_cache” be more appropriate?\r
+> \r
+> \r
+> > +	err = register_filesystem(&exfat_fs_type);\r
+> > +	if (err)\r
+> > +		goto error;\r
+> …\r
+> \r
+> Can the label “destroy_cache” be more appropriate?\r
+> \r
+> \r
+I checked your all points, Will fix them on V2.\r
+Thanks for your review!\r
+\r
+> Regards,\r
 > Markus
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest
index 58ea9e8..00f70b3 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -3,9 +3,9 @@
  "ref\09e9bac40-109c-3349-24da-532c540638c2@web.de\0"
  "From\0Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@samsung.com>\0"
  "Subject\0RE: [PATCH 02/13] exfat: add super block operations\0"
- "Date\0Mon, 18 Nov 2019 05:01:52 +0000\0"
+ "Date\0Mon, 18 Nov 2019 14:01:52 +0900\0"
  "To\0'Markus Elfring' <Markus.Elfring@web.de>"
- " linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org\0"
+ " <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>\0"
  "Cc\0linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org"
   kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
   'Christoph Hellwig' <hch@lst.de>
@@ -15,99 +15,99 @@
  " linkinjeon@gmail.com\0"
  "\00:1\0"
  "b\0"
- "> \342\200\246\n"
- "> > +++ b/fs/exfat/super.c\n"
- "> \342\200\246\n"
- "> > +static int exfat_show_options(struct seq_file *m, struct dentry *root)\n"
- "> > +{\n"
- "> \342\200\246\n"
- "> > +\tseq_printf(m, \",fmask=%04o\", opts->fs_fmask);\n"
- "> > +\tseq_printf(m, \",dmask=%04o\", opts->fs_dmask);\n"
- "> \n"
- "> How do you think about to combine these two function calls into a single one?\n"
- "> \n"
- "> \n"
- "> > +static int __exfat_fill_super(struct super_block *sb)\n"
- "> > +{\n"
- "> \342\200\246\n"
- "> > +\t\texfat_msg(sb, KERN_ERR, \"unable to read boot sector\");\n"
- "> > +\t\tret = -EIO;\n"
- "> > +\t\tgoto out;\n"
- "> \342\200\246\n"
- "> \n"
- "> Would you like to simplify this place?\n"
- "> \n"
- "> +\t\treturn -EIO;\n"
- "> \n"
- "> \n"
- "> \342\200\246\n"
- "> > +\t\texfat_msg(sb, KERN_ERR, \"failed to load upcase table\");\n"
- "> > +\t\tgoto out;\n"
- "> \n"
- "> Would you like to omit this label?\n"
- "> \n"
- "> +\t\treturn ret;\n"
- "> \n"
- "> \n"
- "> > +static int exfat_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, struct fs_context *fc)\n"
- "> > +{\n"
- "> \342\200\246\n"
- "> > +\t\texfat_msg(sb, KERN_ERR, \"failed to recognize exfat type\");\n"
- "> > +\t\tgoto failed_mount;\n"
- "> \n"
- "> The local variable \342\200\234root_inode\342\200\235 contains still a null pointer at this place.\n"
- "> \n"
- "> * Thus I would find a jump target like \342\200\234reset_s_root\342\200\235 more appropriate.\n"
- "> \n"
- "> * Can the corresponding pointer initialisation be omitted then?\n"
- "> \n"
- "> \n"
- "> \342\200\246\n"
- "> > +failed_mount:\n"
- "> > +\tif (root_inode)\n"
- "> > +\t\tiput(root_inode);\n"
- "> \342\200\246\n"
- "> \n"
- "> I am informed in the way that this function tolerates the passing\n"
- "> of null pointers.\n"
- "> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/i\n"
- "> node.c?id=1d4c79ed324ad780cfc3ad38364ba1fd585dd2a8#n1567\n"
- "> https://protect2.fireeye.com/url?k=34e5568f-697957ef-34e4ddc0-0cc47a31307c-\n"
- "> 7f9b30869a6ffaa4&u=https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.4-\n"
- "> rc7/source/fs/inode.c#L1567\n"
- "> \n"
- "> Thus I suggest to omit the extra pointer check also at this place.\n"
- "> \n"
- "> \n"
- "> > +static int __init init_exfat_fs(void)\n"
- "> > +{\n"
- "> \342\200\246\n"
- "> +\terr = exfat_cache_init();\n"
- "> +\tif (err)\n"
- "> +\t\tgoto error;\n"
- "> \n"
- "> Can it be nicer to return directly?\n"
- "> \n"
- "> \n"
- "> \342\200\246\n"
- "> > +\tif (!exfat_inode_cachep)\n"
- "> > +\t\tgoto error;\n"
- "> \n"
- "> Can an other jump target like \342\200\234shutdown_cache\342\200\235 be more appropriate?\n"
- "> \n"
- "> \n"
- "> > +\terr = register_filesystem(&exfat_fs_type);\n"
- "> > +\tif (err)\n"
- "> > +\t\tgoto error;\n"
- "> \342\200\246\n"
- "> \n"
- "> Can the label \342\200\234destroy_cache\342\200\235 be more appropriate?\n"
- "> \n"
- "> \n"
- "I checked your all points, Will fix them on V2.\n"
- "Thanks for your review!\n"
- "\n"
- "> Regards,\n"
+ "> \342\200\246\r\n"
+ "> > +++ b/fs/exfat/super.c\r\n"
+ "> \342\200\246\r\n"
+ "> > +static int exfat_show_options(struct seq_file *m, struct dentry *root)\r\n"
+ "> > +{\r\n"
+ "> \342\200\246\r\n"
+ "> > +\tseq_printf(m, \",fmask=%04o\", opts->fs_fmask);\r\n"
+ "> > +\tseq_printf(m, \",dmask=%04o\", opts->fs_dmask);\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> How do you think about to combine these two function calls into a single one?\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> > +static int __exfat_fill_super(struct super_block *sb)\r\n"
+ "> > +{\r\n"
+ "> \342\200\246\r\n"
+ "> > +\t\texfat_msg(sb, KERN_ERR, \"unable to read boot sector\");\r\n"
+ "> > +\t\tret = -EIO;\r\n"
+ "> > +\t\tgoto out;\r\n"
+ "> \342\200\246\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> Would you like to simplify this place?\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> +\t\treturn -EIO;\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> \342\200\246\r\n"
+ "> > +\t\texfat_msg(sb, KERN_ERR, \"failed to load upcase table\");\r\n"
+ "> > +\t\tgoto out;\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> Would you like to omit this label?\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> +\t\treturn ret;\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> > +static int exfat_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, struct fs_context *fc)\r\n"
+ "> > +{\r\n"
+ "> \342\200\246\r\n"
+ "> > +\t\texfat_msg(sb, KERN_ERR, \"failed to recognize exfat type\");\r\n"
+ "> > +\t\tgoto failed_mount;\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> The local variable \342\200\234root_inode\342\200\235 contains still a null pointer at this place.\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> * Thus I would find a jump target like \342\200\234reset_s_root\342\200\235 more appropriate.\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> * Can the corresponding pointer initialisation be omitted then?\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> \342\200\246\r\n"
+ "> > +failed_mount:\r\n"
+ "> > +\tif (root_inode)\r\n"
+ "> > +\t\tiput(root_inode);\r\n"
+ "> \342\200\246\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> I am informed in the way that this function tolerates the passing\r\n"
+ "> of null pointers.\r\n"
+ "> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/i\r\n"
+ "> node.c?id=1d4c79ed324ad780cfc3ad38364ba1fd585dd2a8#n1567\r\n"
+ "> https://protect2.fireeye.com/url?k=34e5568f-697957ef-34e4ddc0-0cc47a31307c-\r\n"
+ "> 7f9b30869a6ffaa4&u=https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.4-\r\n"
+ "> rc7/source/fs/inode.c#L1567\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> Thus I suggest to omit the extra pointer check also at this place.\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> > +static int __init init_exfat_fs(void)\r\n"
+ "> > +{\r\n"
+ "> \342\200\246\r\n"
+ "> +\terr = exfat_cache_init();\r\n"
+ "> +\tif (err)\r\n"
+ "> +\t\tgoto error;\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> Can it be nicer to return directly?\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> \342\200\246\r\n"
+ "> > +\tif (!exfat_inode_cachep)\r\n"
+ "> > +\t\tgoto error;\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> Can an other jump target like \342\200\234shutdown_cache\342\200\235 be more appropriate?\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> > +\terr = register_filesystem(&exfat_fs_type);\r\n"
+ "> > +\tif (err)\r\n"
+ "> > +\t\tgoto error;\r\n"
+ "> \342\200\246\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> Can the label \342\200\234destroy_cache\342\200\235 be more appropriate?\r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "> \r\n"
+ "I checked your all points, Will fix them on V2.\r\n"
+ "Thanks for your review!\r\n"
+ "\r\n"
+ "> Regards,\r\n"
  > Markus
 
-feb76f6b59f63bbfc329f87eaa1276bea26eb975f68e9f63da4fe677852c922f
+737ef900d1481bd9dda30b1c7d2d7d703e2894f3b0f3fc52ab2571b3b4b55de4

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.