[PATCH 4/4] xfs: fix sign handling problem in xfs_bmbt_diff_two_keys

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>

In xfs_bmbt_diff_two_keys, we perform a signed int64_t subtraction with
two unsigned 64-bit quantities.  If the second quantity is actually the
"maximum" key (all ones) as used in _query_all, the subtraction
effectively becomes addition of two positive numbers and the function
returns incorrect results.  Fix this with explicit comparisons of the
unsigned values.  Nobody needs this now, but the online repair patches
will need this to work properly.

Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
 fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c |   16 ++++++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)


diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c
index fbb18ba5d905..3c1a805b3775 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c
@@ -400,8 +400,20 @@ xfs_bmbt_diff_two_keys(
 	union xfs_btree_key	*k1,
 	union xfs_btree_key	*k2)
 {
-	return (int64_t)be64_to_cpu(k1->bmbt.br_startoff) -
-			  be64_to_cpu(k2->bmbt.br_startoff);
+	uint64_t		a = be64_to_cpu(k1->bmbt.br_startoff);
+	uint64_t		b = be64_to_cpu(k2->bmbt.br_startoff);
+
+	/*
+	 * Note: This routine previously casted a and b to int64 and subtracted
+	 * them to generate a result.  This lead to problems if b was the
+	 * "maximum" key value (all ones) being signed incorrectly, hence this
+	 * somewhat less efficient version.
+	 */
+	if (a > b)
+		return 1;
+	else if (b > a)
+		return -1;
+	return 0;
 }
 
 static xfs_failaddr_t




[Index of Archives]     [XFS Filesystem Development (older mail)]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux