On 10/25/19 7:59 AM, Colin Ian King wrote: > On 25/10/2019 14:56, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 10/25/19 6:54 AM, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> On 10/25/19 6:43 AM, Colin King wrote: >>>> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> Shifting the integer value 1U is evaluated with type unsigned int >>>> using 32-bit arithmetic and then used in an expression that expects >>>> a 64-bit value, so there is potentially an integer overflow. Fix this >>>> by using the BIT_ULL macro to perform the shift and avoid the overflow. >>> >>> Good catch, that should indeed have been 1ULL. I'll fold in your >>> fix, thanks! >> >> BTW, this missed the same issue on the clear side of it, in >> io_worker_handle_work(). I've fixed that one up the same way. >> > Ah, good, somehow the scanner missed that. Something to take a look at! :-) -- Jens Axboe
