Re: [PATCH 4/7] ubifs: do not ubifs_inode() on potentially NULL pointer

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 10:17 AM Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> new_inode() may return NULL, so only derefence the return inode when
> non NULL. This is merely a cleanup as calling ubifs_inode() on a NULL
> pointer doesn't do any harm, only using the return value would.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  fs/ubifs/dir.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ubifs/dir.c b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
> index 0b98e3c8b461..cfce5fee9262 100644
> --- a/fs/ubifs/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
> @@ -95,10 +95,10 @@ struct inode *ubifs_new_inode(struct ubifs_info *c, struct inode *dir,
>         }
>
>         inode = new_inode(c->vfs_sb);
> -       ui = ubifs_inode(inode);
>         if (!inode)
>                 return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>
> +       ui = ubifs_inode(inode);
>         /*
>          * Set 'S_NOCMTIME' to prevent VFS form updating [mc]time of inodes and
>          * marking them dirty in file write path (see 'file_update_time()').

Acked-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@xxxxxx>

-- 
Thanks,
//richard



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux