Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> ngroups is ext4_group_t (unsigned int) while next_linear_group treat it
> in int. If ngroups is bigger than max number described by int, it will
> be treat as a negative number. Then "return group + 1 >= ngroups ? 0 :
> group + 1;" may keep returning 0.
> Switch int to ext4_group_t in next_linear_group to fix the overflow.
>
Fixes: 196e402adf2e ("ext4: improve cr 0 / cr 1 group scanning")
With that feel free to add:
Reviewed-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/ext4/mballoc.c | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> index 90ffabac100b..33ee3991f62c 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> @@ -1081,8 +1081,9 @@ static inline int should_optimize_scan(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac)
> * Return next linear group for allocation. If linear traversal should not be
> * performed, this function just returns the same group
> */
> -static int
> -next_linear_group(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac, int group, int ngroups)
> +static ext4_group_t
> +next_linear_group(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac, ext4_group_t group,
> + ext4_group_t ngroups)
> {
> if (!should_optimize_scan(ac))
> goto inc_and_return;
> --
> 2.30.0
