From: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 03:42:00 +0000
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 09:11:25PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 00:12:24 +0000
>>
>> > Am I missing something here, or is it simply that the thing predates
>> > current_pt_regs()?
>>
>> It probably just predates current_pt_regs(), yes.
>
> OK... Another fun question in the same area:
> asmlinkage long sys32_ftruncate64(unsigned int fd, unsigned long high, unsigned long low)
> {
> if ((int)high < 0)
> return -EINVAL;
> else
> return sys_ftruncate(fd, (high << 32) | low);
> }
>
> Is there any reason we want to check high right there? After all,
> sys_ftruncate() will produce exactly that on MSB of its second
> argument set... The same goes for sys32_truncate() - sys_truncate()
> will yield -EINVAL on negative loff_t.
Indeed, both checks look like they are extraneous.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
