Re: [PATCH RESEND] fs: use UB-safe check for signed addition overflow in remap_verify_area

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: dsterba@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] fs: use UB-safe check for signed addition overflow in remap_verify_area
From: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 10:49:24 -0800
Cc: linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, natechancellor@xxxxxxxxx, clang-built-linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@xxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20190808123942.19592-1-dsterba@suse.com>

Yeah, looks like this kills two birds with one stone; both observed signed
integer overflow and -Wmisleading-indentation.
Reviewed-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@xxxxxxxxxx>

References:
- [PATCH RESEND] fs: use UB-safe check for signed addition overflow in remap_verify_area
  - From: David Sterba

Prev by Date: [PATCH] fscrypt: include <linux/ioctl.h> in UAPI header
Next by Date: Re: kernel BUG at fs/buffer.c:LINE!
Previous by thread: [PATCH RESEND] fs: use UB-safe check for signed addition overflow in remap_verify_area
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH RESEND] fs: use UB-safe check for signed addition overflow in remap_verify_area
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux Ext4 Filesystem] [Union Filesystem] [Filesystem Testing] [Ceph Users] [Ecryptfs] [AutoFS] [Kernel Newbies] [Share Photos] [Security] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux Cachefs] [Reiser Filesystem] [Linux RAID] [Samba] [Device Mapper] [CEPH Development]

Powered by Linux