On 10/12/18 12:08 PM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
The unsigned 32 bits overflow check for the zone size value is already
done within sd_zbc_check_zones() with the test:
} else if (logical_to_sectors(sdkp->device, zone_blocks) > UINT_MAX) {
so there is no need to check again for an out of range value in
sd_zbc_read_zones(). Simplify the code and fix sd_zbc_check_zones()
error return to -EFBIG instead of -ENODEV if the zone size is too large.
Change the return type of sd_zbc_check_zones() to an int for the error
code and return the zone size (zone_blocks) through a u32 pointer to
avoid overflowing the signed 32 return value.
Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c | 19 ++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c b/drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c
index ca73c46931c0..0678e1e108b0 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c
@@ -373,7 +373,7 @@ static int sd_zbc_check_zoned_characteristics(struct scsi_disk *sdkp,
* Returns the zone size in number of blocks upon success or an error code
* upon failure.
*/
-static s64 sd_zbc_check_zones(struct scsi_disk *sdkp)
+static int sd_zbc_check_zones(struct scsi_disk *sdkp, u32 *zblocks)
{
u64 zone_blocks = 0;
sector_t max_lba, block = 0;
Actually I thought to just change the 's32' to 'int', and not adding
another parameter; but anyway.
Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxxx>
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Teamlead Storage & Networking
hare@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
