On Mon, 21 Jun 2021 18:01:17 +0200 Rasmus Villemoes <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 07/05/2021 12.26, Mel Gorman wrote: > > On Fri, May 07, 2021 at 08:45:03AM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > >> In the event that somebody would call this with an already fully > >> populated page_array, the last loop iteration would do an access > >> beyond the end of page_array. > >> > >> It's of course extremely unlikely that would ever be done, but this > >> triggers my internal static analyzer. Also, if it really is not > >> supposed to be invoked this way (i.e., with no NULL entries in > >> page_array), the nr_populated<nr_pages check could simply be removed > >> instead. > >> > >> Fixes: 0f87d9d30f21 (mm/page_alloc: add an array-based interface to the bulk page allocator) > >> Signed-off-by: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Andrew, will you get this to Linus before 5.13 is released? I got a mail > on May 9 that it had been added to your queue, but I don't see it in > master yet. I had it queued for 5.14-rc1. I'll move it into the 5.13 queue as it fixes a post-5.12 thing, but nothing in the changelog indicates that it's at all urgent? Was the changelog missing some important info? : In the event that somebody would call this with an already fully populated : page_array, the last loop iteration would do an access beyond the end of : page_array. : : It's of course extremely unlikely that would ever be done, but this : triggers my internal static analyzer. Also, if it really is not supposed : to be invoked this way (i.e., with no NULL entries in page_array), the : nr_populated<nr_pages check could simply be removed instead.
