On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 03:53:44PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Wed, 13 Nov 2024 at 17:31, Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Please take a look at the top of #vfs.misc and tell me whether this is > > ok with you. > > One more thing I'd do is: > > - if (seq->count == start) > + if (seq->count <= start + 1) > > This would handle the (broken) case of just a single comma in the > options. So it's not a bug fix per-se, but would make it clear that > the loop will run at least once, and so the seq->count calculation at > the end won't be skewed. > > The buf_start calculation could also be moved further down before the > loop, where it's actually used. > > I don't find the variable naming much better, how about taking the > naming from string_unescape: > > opt_start -> src - pointer to escaped string > buf_start -> dst - pointer to de-escaped string > > The others make sense. Fine by me. I'm about to send pull-requests so I would suggest you send a cleanup that I can include post-rc1 so we don't have to rebase right now.
