Hi Kees,
On 01/07/2017 10:33 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 8:55 AM, Sven Schmidt
><4sschmid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> This patch updates fs/pstore and fs/squashfs to use the updated functions from
>> the new LZ4 module.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sven Schmidt <4sschmid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> fs/pstore/platform.c | 14 ++++++++------
>> fs/squashfs/lz4_wrapper.c | 12 ++++++------
>> 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/pstore/platform.c b/fs/pstore/platform.c
>> index 729677e..a0d8ca8 100644
>> --- a/fs/pstore/platform.c
>> +++ b/fs/pstore/platform.c
>> @@ -342,31 +342,33 @@ static int compress_lz4(const void *in, void *out, size_t inlen, size_t outlen)
>> {
>> int ret;
>>
>> - ret = lz4_compress(in, inlen, out, &outlen, workspace);
>> + ret = LZ4_compress_default(in, out, inlen, outlen, workspace);
>> if (ret) {
>> + // ret is 0 means an error occured
>
>If that's true, then shouldn't the "if" logic be changed? Also, here
>and in all following comments are C++ style instead of kernel C-style.
>This should be "/* ret == 0 means an error occured */", though really,
>that should be obvious from the code and the comment isn't really
>needed.
indeed, it should. I fixed that one.
>> pr_err("lz4_compress error, ret = %d!\n", ret);
>If it's always going to be zero here, is there a better place to get
>details on why it failed?
It is always going to be zero. Honestly, after looking at the current LZ4 in kernel again
I don't get why there actually was a need to print the return value since lz4_compress
will (as far as I see) always return -1 in case of an error while the new lz4_compress_fast/default
will return 0 in such case. Maybe I should just stick with the error?
Thanks,
Sven
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
