On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 11:12 AM, mnipxh <mnipxh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> When pgoff_t index is 32bit, sector_t block is 64bit, need check if block number is too big.
> If block is bigger than (4Gb * PAGE_SIZE), index becomes a wrong value.
> Commit e5657933863f43cc6bb76a54d659303dafaa9e58 wants to do this. But it gives an uncorrect check.
> I think block != index << sizebits is correct. And it can detect such issue above.
I don't understand why you think the current check is incorrect.
It is testing that the calculation hasn't overflowed. It is correct.
It *should* use the same calculation, to (a) make it more obvious that
it's double-checking the earlier calculation in a different type, and
(b) to make it easier for the compiler to optimize it away if sector_t
and pgoff_t are the same size.
So the current code is correct, afaik. Note that "index" is "pgoff_t",
but "block >> sizebits" is "sector_t".
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
