Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 10:43:40AM +0100, Valerie Clement wrote:
Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
What about this ? I guess we will overflow start = start << bsbits;
Hi Aneesh,
your patch below doesn't fix the issue, because as start_off is also
loff_t, start_off = ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical << bsbits also overflows.
loff_t is 64 bits.
typedef __kernel_loff_t loff_t;
typedef long long __kernel_loff_t;
typedef __u32 ext4_lblk_t;
typedef unsigned long long ext4_fsblk_t
start_off = ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical << bsbits;
In the above line what we are storing in start_off is the offset in bytes.So it makes
sense to use the type loff_t. It is neither logical block nor physical block.
Oh yes, sorry, you're right. I read too quickly.
In fact, it's missing a cast :
start_off = (loff_t) ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical << bsbits;
With that change, the test is ok.
Valérie
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
