Re: [PATCH] btrfs: free qgroup configuration when quota enable fails
Qu Wenruo <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-btrfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
在 2026/8/15 16:14, Guanjie Chen 写道: > Hi Qu, > > Thanks for the review. > > I agree the error path should be reversed, even though btrfs_free_qgroup_config() has defensive checks so it won't UAF. But this isn't a one-liner – maybe we can refactor the whole init/cleanup flow later and fix it properly. > > As for contributing: I know there's been lots of LLM noise lately, and I don't want to add to it. I've been studying btrfs for about 2~3 years now. For my next patch, would it help if I clearly explain the root cause, my reasoning, and the solution in the commit message or cover letter? I'd like to make review smoother. I don't care, the policy is there, and all active developers are following it: https://docs.kernel.org/process/coding-assistants.html I see no point why you want to be special and do not disclose whether you have used LLM, unless you have something to hide and then I have all reasons to question your motivation. Even well known developers are using LLM actively, e.g: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/[email protected]/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/69d0043e0f6a3d17048dfde857127ab0bf331154.1785190866.git.boris@bur.io/ And of course myself: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/61fd5ab4b532ba3a7915dc629339db230cccd52f.1786007917.git.wqu@suse.com/ It's very simple, if you used LLM to analyze/fix the bug, then just disclose it. > > Thanks again for your time. > > Best, > Guanjie