On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 04:12:18PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 3/20/19 2:34 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > In theory INUMBERS will never return an ocount of zero, but on the off > > chance it ever does we'll negative index the igroup array and return > > stack contents for an inode number. Don't do that. > > > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Is there more of a story behind this? ;) /me can't remember, I think it was just shutting up coverity complaints. --D > Reviewed-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > io/open.c | 3 +++ > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/io/open.c b/io/open.c > > index f5fbd2c4..a406ea54 100644 > > --- a/io/open.c > > +++ b/io/open.c > > @@ -698,6 +698,9 @@ get_last_inode(void) > > lastgrp = ocount; > > } > > > > + if (lastgrp == 0) > > + return 0; > > + > > lastgrp--; > > > > /* The last inode number in use */ > >
