On 4/19/24 8:36 PM, Baokun Li wrote: > @@ -761,12 +747,15 @@ static void erofs_free_dev_context(struct > erofs_dev_context *devs) > > static void erofs_fc_free(struct fs_context *fc) > { > - struct erofs_fs_context *ctx = fc->fs_private; > + struct erofs_sb_info *sbi = fc->s_fs_info; > + > + if (!sbi) > + return; This is the only difference comparing to the original code literally. Is there any chance that fc->s_fs_info can be NULL when erofs_fc_free() is called? Otherwise looks good to me. -- Thanks, Jingbo
- [PATCH -next v3 0/2] erofs: reliably distinguish... Baokun Li via Linux-erofs
- [PATCH -next v3 2/2] erofs: reliably distin... Baokun Li via Linux-erofs
- Re: [PATCH -next v3 2/2] erofs: reliabl... Jingbo Xu
- Re: [PATCH -next v3 2/2] erofs: reliabl... Gao Xiang
- [PATCH -next v3 1/2] erofs: get rid of erof... Baokun Li via Linux-erofs
- Re: [PATCH -next v3 1/2] erofs: get rid... Jingbo Xu
- Re: [PATCH -next v3 1/2] erofs: get... Baokun Li via Linux-erofs
- Re: [PATCH -next v3 1/2] erofs:... Jingbo Xu
- Re: [PATCH -next v3 1/2] erofs: get rid... Gao Xiang
- Re: [PATCH -next v3 1/2] erofs: get rid... Gao Xiang
- Re: [PATCH -next v3 1/2] erofs: get rid... Chao Yu