> On Apr 24, 2023, at 13:02, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 12:51:22PM +0800, Hao Ge wrote: >> Shifting signed 32-bit value by 31 bits is undefined, so changing >> significant bit to unsigned. The UBSAN warning calltrace like below: > >> UBSAN: shift-out-of-bounds in fs/nsfs.c:306:32 >> left shift of 1 by 31 places cannot be represented in type 'int' >> CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 6.3.0-rc4+ #2 >> Call trace: >> <TASK> >> dump_backtrace+0x134/0x1e0 >> show_stack+0x2c/0x3c >> dump_stack_lvl+0xb0/0xd4 >> dump_stack+0x14/0x1c >> ubsan_epilogue+0xc/0x3c >> __ubsan_handle_shift_out_of_bounds+0xb0/0x14c >> nsfs_init+0x4c/0xb0 >> start_kernel+0x38c/0x738 >> __primary_switched+0xbc/0xc4 >> </TASK> >> >> Fixes: e462ec50cb5f ("VFS: Differentiate mount flags (MS_*) from internal superblock flags") >> Signed-off-by: Hao Ge <gehao@xxxxxxxxxx> > > *snort* > > IMO something like "spotted by UBSAN" is more than enough here - > stack trace is completely pointless. > > Otherwise, no problems with the patch - it's obviously safe. Thanks for taking time to review this patch. I fully agree with your suggestion, as it is not just this one place that reported this error, although they are the same reason. I will remove stack trace and send v3.