From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from embla.dev.snart.me (embla.dev.snart.me [54.252.183.203]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E23A2877F7 for ; Fri, 1 May 2026 12:20:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=54.252.183.203 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777638015; cv=none; b=IXS858uyfey151SXF7wp9nLXfWUGoocH2ymLEMECenlugsGJmxcSzivko4nnnwDcvA5jNNQzuG/Ae9pScSyWYyVlrimQuMtBZT0C4oHxOdHKoVuiPBkswkkifInvBcM9Px8wUpIpQ/YhKJgVg7lPKAsAr5dlFear3WHDjxAbDgw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777638015; c=relaxed/simple; bh=3hTPEO4P5unEpU7JSUdozo+MFvhEY856+ChHFp1RRH8=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=Km4nPgZG+Dxkn+BBMA0PuTiwskzwan4FFzEhWSKHoB97MFLV3GEDyIp+vLk7VMOW6QvEkQfrVuHllmstqMjaLzKFucjvl8sS+P9W7opnNma7YyDLEpWyXxzjC6letM+JKJYf1rIfqfWTapyPZT8V4Foniy8iPzqt+JpB2HmUcxY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=dev.snart.me; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dev.snart.me; arc=none smtp.client-ip=54.252.183.203 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=dev.snart.me Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dev.snart.me Received: from embla.dev.snart.me (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by embla.dev.snart.me (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04C121D459; Fri, 1 May 2026 12:20:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.18] ([182.226.25.243]) by embla.dev.snart.me with ESMTPSA id DCOHKXWa9Gk+TQYA8KYfjw (envelope-from ); Fri, 01 May 2026 12:20:05 +0000 Message-ID: <54be304b-828a-4b79-8607-5004dbf78003@dev.snart.me> Date: Fri, 1 May 2026 21:20:01 +0900 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 4/4] exfat: more pedantic upcase table validity check To: Namjae Jeon Cc: "Yuezhang.Mo@sony.com" , Sungjong Seo , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" References: <20260428235038.93816-1-dxdt@dev.snart.me> <20260428235038.93816-5-dxdt@dev.snart.me> <383f2d82-5f31-49df-9c00-b76b6fa45370@dev.snart.me> From: David Timber Content-Language: en-US, ko Autocrypt: addr=dxdt@dev.snart.me; keydata= xjMEYmJg1hYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdAf5E+ri1XLtjqYbZdHOyc8oS+1/XJ5bSlbx5WHXmVBZzN IERhdmlkIFRpbWJlciA8ZHhkdEBkZXYuc25hcnQubWU+wpQEExYKADwWIQQn/Jn96EMUaIoF X+T/ldyyrZpWaAUCYmJg1gIbAwULCQgHAgMiAgEGFQoJCAsCBBYCAwECHgcCF4AACgkQ/5Xc sq2aVmjJZwD8COjPlUwccrlRvbNQ6f87DWchtYO0o8W2DNRM3RLps0EA/jEhIbRV6AsyC8jr 30Ut3aJ3/mO/6G4sLj7OvkEEBH0MzjgEYmJg1hIKKwYBBAGXVQEFAQEHQFpgtIgaByv9lIEY EmpavMO0pYjtu7TMJynwdnGYkN9LAwEIB8J4BBgWCgAgFiEEJ/yZ/ehDFGiKBV/k/5Xcsq2a VmgFAmJiYNYCGwwACgkQ/5Xcsq2aVmhFCwEA0kM9VyYB4bLCM7+SuXUUH+5Ec99Nj4RXxFad Key9GuwA/2BZK6bNyrLSfEk2JDRoskqf7OIL0wa6JOD5SrBnMe8E In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 5/1/26 20:27, Namjae Jeon wrote: > On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 6:24 PM David Timber wrote: >> On 4/30/26 16:58, Yuezhang.Mo@sony.com wrote: >>>> static int exfat_load_upcase_table(struct super_block *sb, >>>> - sector_t sector, unsigned long long num_sectors, >>>> - unsigned int utbl_checksum) >>>> + unsigned long long tbl_size, sector_t sector, >>>> + unsigned long long num_sectors, unsigned int utbl_checksum) >>> After adding the parameter tbl_size, the parameter num_sectors is no >>> longer needed. >> Change the func signature? I'd like to hear Jeon's opinion on this. > I agree. It is cleaner to remove num_sectors from the arguments and > calculate it inside exfat_load_upcase_table() using tbl_size and > sb->s_blocksize_bits. Ack'd