| To: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 15/19] mkfs: don't treat files as though they are block devices |
| From: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 8 Apr 2016 23:12:12 -0500 |
| Delivered-to: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <CACj3i73JEzCj-4kp3=H9mjXCKYgcOUYCOyq-aZSWZFXUih+0MA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <1458818136-56043-1-git-send-email-jtulak@xxxxxxxxxx> <1458818136-56043-16-git-send-email-jtulak@xxxxxxxxxx> <5706FA7C.7020103@xxxxxxxxxxx> <CACj3i73JEzCj-4kp3=H9mjXCKYgcOUYCOyq-aZSWZFXUih+0MA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 |
On 4/8/16 9:58 AM, Jan Tulak wrote: > This one causes at least one interesting issue: > > #mkfs/mkfs.xfs > Error accessing specified device (null): Bad address > Usage: mkfs.xfs > ... > > because: > > check_device_type(dfile, &xi.disfile, !dsize, !dfile, > Nflag ? NULL : &xi.dcreat, force_overwrite, > "d"); > > so "dfile" can be NULL, but that function immediately tries to stat it. > > > âA simple if NULL, then usage() should take care of this... Well, think hard about that. If dfile == NULL and bails with usage(), then what is the point of having !dfile as a function argument? Validation of having a target specified as either -dfile= or as the last argument should probably happen before the call to check_device_type. -Eric |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 17/19] xfsprogs: disable truncating of files, Dave Chinner |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Apparently successful xfs_copy gives "-9" returncode, Richard C |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 15/19] mkfs: don't treat files as though they are block devices, Jan Tulak |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 15/19] mkfs: don't treat files as though they are block devices, Jan Tulak |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |