On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 09:11:37AM +0800, Edward Adam Davis wrote: > On Tue, 7 May 2024 20:59:14 -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote: > > > > diff --git a/fs/bcachefs/sb-clean.c b/fs/bcachefs/sb-clean.c > > > > index 35ca3f138de6..194e55b11137 100644 > > > > --- a/fs/bcachefs/sb-clean.c > > > > +++ b/fs/bcachefs/sb-clean.c > > > > @@ -278,6 +278,17 @@ static int bch2_sb_clean_validate(struct bch_sb *sb, > > > > return -BCH_ERR_invalid_sb_clean; > > > > } > > > > > > > > + for (struct jset_entry *entry = clean->start; > > > > + entry != vstruct_end(&clean->field); > > > > + entry = vstruct_next(entry)) { > > > > + if ((void *) vstruct_next(entry) > vstruct_end(&clean->field)) { > > > > + prt_str(err, "entry type "); > > > > + bch2_prt_jset_entry_type(err, le16_to_cpu(entry->type)); > > > > + prt_str(err, " overruns end of section"); > > > > + return -BCH_ERR_invalid_sb_clean; > > > > + } > > > > + } > > > > + > > > The original judgment here is sufficient, there is no need to add this section of inspection. > > > > No, we need to be able to print things that failed to validate so that > > we see what went wrong. > The follow check work fine, why add above check ? > 1 if (vstruct_bytes(&clean->field) < sizeof(*clean)) { > 268 prt_printf(err, "wrong size (got %zu should be %zu)", > 1 vstruct_bytes(&clean->field), sizeof(*clean)); > You sure you're not inebriated?