Looks fine to me. And usually akpm picks them up these days. On Wed, 2015-09-09 at 14:59 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 06/30/2015 10:36 AM, Dave Hansen wrote: > > From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > The comment here says that it is checking for invalid bits. But, > > the mask is *actually* checking to ensure that _any_ valid bit > > is set, which is quite different. > > > > Add the actual check which was intended. Retain the existing > > check because it actually does something useful: ensure that some > > inotify bits are being added to the watch. Plus, this is > > existing behavior which would be nice to preserve. > > > > I did a quick sniff test that inotify functions and that my > > 'inotify-tools' package passes 'make check'. > > Did anybody have any comments on this patch? Who picks up inotify > patches? > > > b/fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c | 3 +++ > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > diff -puN fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c~inotify-EINVAL-on > > -invalid-bit fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c > > --- a/fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c~inotify-EINVAL-on-invalid > > -bit 2015-06-26 13:33:30.277219285 -0700 > > +++ b/fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c 2015-06-26 > > 13:35:19.026122033 -0700 > > @@ -707,6 +707,9 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(inotify_add_watch, int, > > unsigned flags = 0; > > > > /* don't allow invalid bits: we don't want flags set */ > > + if (unlikely(mask & ~ALL_INOTIFY_BITS)) > > + return -EINVAL; > > + /* require at least one valid bit set in the mask */ > > if (unlikely(!(mask & ALL_INOTIFY_BITS))) > > return -EINVAL; > > > > _ > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html