On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 09:48:31PM +0530, Bharath Vedartham wrote: > csum_partial() gives different results for little-endian and big-endian > hosts. This causes images created on little-endian hosts and mounted on > big endian hosts to see csum mismatches. This causes an endianness bug. > Sparse gives a warning as csum_partial returns a restricted integer type > __wsum_t and xattr_hash expects __u32. This warning acts as a reminder > for this bug and should not be suppressed. > > This comment aims to convey these endianness issues. > > Signed-off-by: Bharath Vedartham <linux.bhar@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/reiserfs/xattr.c | 10 ++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/fs/reiserfs/xattr.c b/fs/reiserfs/xattr.c > index 32d8986..0ea6654 100644 > --- a/fs/reiserfs/xattr.c > +++ b/fs/reiserfs/xattr.c > @@ -450,6 +450,16 @@ static struct page *reiserfs_get_page(struct inode *dir, size_t n) > > static inline __u32 xattr_hash(const char *msg, int len) > { > + /* > + * csum_partial() gives different results for little-endian and > + * big endian hosts. Images created on little-endian hosts and > + * mounted on big-endian hosts(and vice versa) will see csum mismatches > + * when trying to fetch xattrs. Treating the hash as __wsum_t would > + * lower the frequency of mismatch. This is an endianness bug in reiserfs. > + * The return statement would result in a sparse warning. Do not fix the sparse > + * warning so as to not hide the reminder of the bug. > + */ > + > return csum_partial(msg, len, 0); > } > > -- > 2.7.4 > Is this good or is it lacking any explanation?