On 12/17/21 4:38 AM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Use of "unsigned short" for loop_validate_block_size() is wrong [1], and
> commit af3c570fb0df422b ("loop: Use blk_validate_block_size() to validate
> block size") changed to use "unsigned int".
>
> However, since lo_simple_ioctl(LOOP_SET_BLOCK_SIZE) passes "unsigned long
> arg" to loop_set_block_size(), blk_validate_block_size() can't validate
> the upper 32bits on 64bits environment. A block size like 0x100000200
> should be rejected.
Wouldn't it make more sense to validate that part on the loop side? A
block size > 32-bit doesn't make any sense.
--
Jens Axboe
