Hi Christoph, On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 9:18 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 10:35:44PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > I'm always triggered by the use of min_t() and other casts: > > mmc->max_blk_size and mmc->max_blk_count are both unsigned int. > > dma_max_mapping_size() returns size_t, which can be 64-bit. > > > > 1) Can the multiplication overflow? > > Probably not, as per commit 2a55c1eac7882232 ("mmc: renesas_sdhi: > > prevent overflow for max_req_size"), but I thought I'd better ask. > > 2) In theory, dma_max_mapping_size() can return a number that doesn't > > fit in 32-bit, and will be truncated (to e.g. 0), leading to max_req_size > > is zero? > > This really should use a min_t on size_t. Otherwise the patch looks > fine: Followed by another min() to make it fit in mmc->max_req_size, which is unsigned int. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds