On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 08:35:31AM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 11.11.13 at 03:49, Kyungsik Lee <kyungsik....@lge.com> wrote: > > Hello Jan, > > > > Thanks for the patch. > > > > On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 09:27:09AM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> "ret", being set to -1 early on, gets cleared by the first invocation > >> of lz4_decompress()/lz4_decompress_unknownoutputsize(), and hence > >> subsequent failures wouldn't be noticed by the caller without setting > >> it back to -1 right after those calls. > >> > >> Reported-by: Matthew Daley <mat...@gmail.com> > >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> > >> Cc: Kyungsik Lee <kyungsik....@lge.com> > >> Cc: Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org> > >> > >> --- a/lib/decompress_unlz4.c > >> +++ b/lib/decompress_unlz4.c > >> @@ -141,6 +141,7 @@ STATIC inline int INIT unlz4(u8 *input, > >> goto exit_2; > >> } > >> > >> + ret = -1; > >> if (flush && flush(outp, dest_len) != dest_len) > >> goto exit_2; > >> if (output) > >> > > What do you think of adding "ret2" for keeping "ret" error status > > which is set by lz4_decompress*() like below. > > I'd be fine with that too, but preferred to submit the smallest > possible (read: one line) patch in this case. > I think it looks neat avoiding "ret" being set to error status in the loop. Can you please resend the patch with those changes?
Acked-by: Kyungsik Lee <kyungsik....@lge.com> Thanks, Kyungsik -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
