On 2025/4/11 23:34, David Howells wrote: >> Fix by breaking the for loop when '@index == 0' which is also more proper >> than '@index <= 0' for unsigned integer comparison. > There isn't really a risk. The list walked by "tmp" and the checks that this > is or is not NULL will prevent a problem. > no fixes tag is added and just improve code logic a bit since there is no reason to continue the loop when @index reach 0. > I also feel that breaking out of the loop with "<= 0" - even if the variable > is unsigned - is safer, on the off chance that someone in the future changes > the signedness of the variable. for parameter @index representing filesystem index. unsigned integer type may be better than signed.
