On Sat, 7 Oct 2023 21:26:22 +0800 Xiao Ni <xni@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 5:42 PM Mariusz Tkaczyk > <mariusz.tkaczyk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 27 Sep 2023 10:52:18 +0800 > > Xiao Ni <xni@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > With gcc version 13.2.1 20230918 (Red Hat 13.2.1-3) (GCC), it reports > > > error: super-ddf.c:1988:58: error: array subscript -1 is below array > > > bounds of ‘struct phys_disk_entry[0]’ [-Werror=array-bounds=] > > > The subscrit is defined as int type. And it can be smaller than 0. > > > > If it can be smaller that 0 then it is something we need to fix. > > I think that it comes from here: > > info->disk.raid_disk = find_phys(ddf, > > ddf->dlist->disk.refnum); info->data_offset = be64_to_cpu(ddf->phys-> > > entries[info->disk.raid_disk]. > > config_size); > > > > find_phys can return -1. > > It is handled few lines bellow. I don't see reason why we cannot handle it > > here too. > > > > if (info->disk.raid_disk >= 0) > > pde = ddf->phys->entries + info->disk.raid_disk; > > > > I think that it will be fair to abort because metadata seems to be > > corrupted. We are referring to info->disk.raid_disk from many places. We > > cannot return error because it is void, we can just return. > > Hi Mariusz > > You mean something like this? > > diff --git a/super-ddf.c b/super-ddf.c > index 7213284e0a59..b6e514042055 100644 > --- a/super-ddf.c > +++ b/super-ddf.c > @@ -1984,6 +1984,9 @@ static void getinfo_super_ddf(struct supertype > *st, struct mdinfo *info, char *m > info->disk.number = be32_to_cpu(ddf->dlist->disk.refnum); > info->disk.raid_disk = find_phys(ddf, > ddf->dlist->disk.refnum); > > + if (info->disk.raid_disk < 0) > + return; > + > info->data_offset = be64_to_cpu(ddf->phys-> > entries[info->disk.raid_disk]. > config_size); > Yes, LGTM! Mariusz
