On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 10:30:40AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 09:58:28AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 07:22:18AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > + /* Avoid wrapping to the beginning of the file */ > > > + if (index + nr_to_read < index) > > > + nr_to_read = ULONG_MAX - index + 1; > > > + /* Don't read past the page containing the last byte of the file */ > > > + if (index + nr_to_read >= end_index) > > > + nr_to_read = end_index - index + 1; > > > > There seem to be a couple off-by-one errors here. Shouldn't it be: > > > > /* Avoid wrapping to the beginning of the file */ > > if (index + nr_to_read < index) > > nr_to_read = ULONG_MAX - index; > > I think it's right. Imagine that index is ULONG_MAX. We should read one > page (the one at ULONG_MAX). That would be ULONG_MAX - ULONG_MAX + 1. > > > /* Don't read past the page containing the last byte of the file */ > > if (index + nr_to_read > end_index) > > nr_to_read = end_index - index + 1; > > > > I.e., 'ULONG_MAX - index' rather than 'ULONG_MAX - index + 1', so that > > 'index + nr_to_read' is then ULONG_MAX rather than overflowed to 0. > > > > Then 'index + nr_to_read > end_index' rather 'index + nr_to_read >= end_index', > > since otherwise nr_to_read can be increased by 1 rather than decreased or stay > > the same as expected. > > Ooh, I missed the overflow case here. It should be: > > + if (index + nr_to_read - 1 > end_index) > + nr_to_read = end_index - index + 1; > But then if someone passes index=0 and nr_to_read=0, this underflows and the entire file gets read. The page cache isn't actually supposed to contain a page at index ULONG_MAX, since MAX_LFS_FILESIZE is at most ((loff_t)ULONG_MAX << PAGE_SHIFT), right? So I don't think we need to worry about reading the page with index ULONG_MAX. I.e. I think it's fine to limit nr_to_read to 'ULONG_MAX - index', if that makes it easier to avoid an overflow or underflow in the next check. - Eric
