From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 E5BC852F99 for ; Wed, 24 Sep 2025 00:53:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758675235; cv=none; b=pqHU0nYqwgWI/hVUxkl3Y0asYsz2n54kzVPn9oNyv2v/AouvRb56zFeZnqjCjjfpbIW0MaLNrQp0pjPenNtfPCLZIHdOXX2dFtS21SOVbx+2HivnIQmFK8P/2wDQzyatAY+GYpBUQ++0JbyzF5g8aNbkIK6/fbbh2QFs+ACZl+E= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758675235; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Wg4O6CNMZoHlviaiO2bZ6Vbi9Bea5eKInpn+wXdxP80=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=O1YWSO3ot6tLMnt7WF/TA3CfYKEvvVxwhZCRY2E7gvrhuWn+3eHOeJoet4V/wCeL0S4YFmJuorfnYyBxnB1O7CmEs6f3PW4n28hNamtNloXW3rNZS4vj2wBJ37xf060dkCvmVVHz3n5VXNgaI2Xh9l4NjXnZzIa/q55ny03PIK0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=XB8Q7Bsx; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="XB8Q7Bsx" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7D26EC4CEF5; Wed, 24 Sep 2025 00:53:54 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1758675234; bh=Wg4O6CNMZoHlviaiO2bZ6Vbi9Bea5eKInpn+wXdxP80=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=XB8Q7BsxGP7LCD2oFvm1hEFC0Wb5Xal8VOiRp3xttftH6XZq11nHmdLxJbybfSckw mM9xq0Ns5U5IQtdAoJJBEMoC4ZN1HHZrdqRvTPJ2nwV7r85KMkl/aOMNe0BASdjDsc rXv+U9CaYyN5xiOzdjbu2rHoIAOgquzIqlAOsDJ9eDTDoyKU/G1EuJsEgJZgXdXyjC pC32rrtN1s90mwmVtIqpRlP1JhV5AYzGVugHfhTQy8SloPmiosYeIETaHLEEEhEmTU hI26XvmTn4h2QbRePpO3qPT2A4zmhlrq4F3MdrGmgi1dbgB4jgFAcMgMkk2AlfDzQ7 iRJIBdmgXXIPQ== Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2025 17:53:53 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Andrey Albershteyn , "A. Wilcox" , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] xfs_scrub: fix strerror_r usage yet again Message-ID: <20250924005353.GW8096@frogsfrogsfrogs> References: <20250919161400.GO8096@frogsfrogsfrogs> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Sep 22, 2025 at 10:01:17AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > The autoconf maigc looks good (as good as autoconf can look anyway), > but why is this code using strerror_r to start with? AFAIK on Linux > strerror is using thread local storage since the damn of time, so > just doing this as: > > fprintf(stream, _("%s."), strerror(error)); > > should be perfectly fine, while also simpler and more portable. But there's no guarantee that the implementation does this, is there? The manpage doesn't say anything like that. --D