From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Theodore Ts'o Subject: Re: [v2] ext4: fix possible non-initialized variable Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 20:52:02 -0400 Message-ID: <20120922005202.GD27207@thunk.org> References: <505739F8.9050305@redhat.com> <50574226.3020908@redhat.com> <20120917153701.GA5510@thunk.org> <20120917182604.GA1959@andromeda.usersys.redhat.com> <20120918035931.GB32195@thunk.org> <20120918125155.GA30408@andromeda.usersys.redhat.com> <20120919201057.GA23237@andromeda.usersys.redhat.com> <20120919204100.GF28470@thunk.org> <505A8678.4060402@redhat.com> <20120921191449.GA18336@andromeda.usersys.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii To: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from li9-11.members.linode.com ([67.18.176.11]:51986 "EHLO imap.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755038Ab2IVAwE (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Sep 2012 20:52:04 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120921191449.GA18336@andromeda.usersys.redhat.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 04:14:49PM -0300, Carlos Maiolino wrote: > Not a bad idea really. > > I've found some functions properly handling the problem (i.e !bh and !err), but > some of them not. I'm thinking in fix functions with missing hole handlers and > after that think about a 'default directory hole handler' for this, instead of > make each function work on a specific way. I'd have to take a look at a patch, but I didn't think there would be enough code to be worth factoring out into a separate function. It's just a conditional, a call to ext4_error(), and then setting up the return code and releasing resources that need to be released on our way out (which tends to be function-specific). Am I missing something? - Ted