From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5EA27CA0 for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 08:28:08 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E555AC005 for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 06:28:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from userp1040.oracle.com (userp1040.oracle.com [156.151.31.81]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 8gvTRTkguPpFLzJD (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 06:28:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 16:27:49 +0300 From: Dan Carpenter Subject: Re: [patch] xfs: don't allow negative error tags Message-ID: <20160624132749.GP32247@mwanda> References: <20160624122234.GA23169@mwanda> <576D31B9.8010908@easystack.cn> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <576D31B9.8010908@easystack.cn> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Jeff Liu Cc: kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 09:12:25PM +0800, Jeff Liu wrote: > Hi Dan, > > xfs_errortag_add() is called by xfs_file_ioctl(), which accept the 1st > argument as signed, i.e, > > typedef struct xfs_error_injection { > __s32 fd; > __s32 errtag; > } xfs_error_injection_t; > > Should we make it happy as well? Also, the typedef can be converted to > to struct xfs_error_injection by removing the depreciated > xfs_error_injection_t > syntax if so. That has been the user interface for a while so I didn't want to change it. regards, dan carpenter _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs