* Q. d_alloc() in pipe(2)
@ 2009-12-29 5:55 hooanon05
2009-12-29 15:02 ` Américo Wang
2009-12-31 3:04 ` Bill Davidsen
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: hooanon05 @ 2009-12-29 5:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro; +Cc: linux-kernel
In pipe(2), create_write_pipe() creates a dentry by
struct qstr name = { .name = "" };
d_alloc(root, &name);
But d_alloc() refers name->len which is uninitialized.
Isn't it better to replace d_alloc() by d_alloc_name(root, "")?
J. R. Okajima
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Q. d_alloc() in pipe(2)
2009-12-29 5:55 Q. d_alloc() in pipe(2) hooanon05
@ 2009-12-29 15:02 ` Américo Wang
2009-12-30 3:41 ` hooanon05
2009-12-31 3:04 ` Bill Davidsen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Américo Wang @ 2009-12-29 15:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: hooanon05; +Cc: viro, linux-kernel
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 02:55:20PM +0900, hooanon05@yahoo.co.jp wrote:
>
>In pipe(2), create_write_pipe() creates a dentry by
> struct qstr name = { .name = "" };
> d_alloc(root, &name);
>
>But d_alloc() refers name->len which is uninitialized.
Well, it is initialized to 0. :)
>Isn't it better to replace d_alloc() by d_alloc_name(root, "")?
>
Maybe not, they totally equal in this case, IMO.
--
Live like a child, think like the god.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Q. d_alloc() in pipe(2)
2009-12-29 15:02 ` Américo Wang
@ 2009-12-30 3:41 ` hooanon05
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: hooanon05 @ 2009-12-30 3:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Américo Wang; +Cc: viro, linux-kernel
Amrico Wang:
> >But d_alloc() refers name->len which is uninitialized.
>
> Well, it is initialized to 0. :)
I didn't know that.
Thanx.
J. R. Okajima
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Q. d_alloc() in pipe(2)
2009-12-29 5:55 Q. d_alloc() in pipe(2) hooanon05
2009-12-29 15:02 ` Américo Wang
@ 2009-12-31 3:04 ` Bill Davidsen
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Bill Davidsen @ 2009-12-31 3:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: hooanon05; +Cc: viro, linux-kernel
hooanon05@yahoo.co.jp wrote:
> In pipe(2), create_write_pipe() creates a dentry by
> struct qstr name = { .name = "" };
> d_alloc(root, &name);
>
> But d_alloc() refers name->len which is uninitialized.
> Isn't it better to replace d_alloc() by d_alloc_name(root, "")?
>
If readability counts, I would say so. Functionally I don't know, I can't see
any problems other than it's unobvious.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-12-31 3:04 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-12-29 5:55 Q. d_alloc() in pipe(2) hooanon05
2009-12-29 15:02 ` Américo Wang
2009-12-30 3:41 ` hooanon05
2009-12-31 3:04 ` Bill Davidsen
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox