On Feb 19, 2014, at 9:50 PM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote: > The ext4_map_blocks() function returns the number of blocks which > satisfying the caller's request. This number of blocks requested by > the caller is specified by an unsigned integer, but the return value > of ext4_map_blocks() is a signed integer (to accomodate error codes > per the kernel's standard error signalling convention). [snip] > return a number large enough that it would overflow a signed integer, > resultimg in a ext4 thinking that the ext4_map_blocks() call had (typo) s/resultimg/resulting/ > @@ -514,6 +514,9 @@ int ext4_map_blocks(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode, > "logical block %lu\n", inode->i_ino, flags, map->m_len, > (unsigned long) map->m_lblk); > > + if (map->m_len >= (1UL << 31)) > + map->m_len = (1UL << 31) - 1; > + Should this instead be INT_MAX? That makes it more clear why the limit is here, and in theory on a platform with 64-bit int it would work properly with a value over (2^31 - 1). Cheers, Andreas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
