5.10-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> [ Upstream commit 22d483b99863202e3631ff66fa0f3c2302c0f96f ] I don't see an obvious reason why the upper 32 bit check needs to be open-coded this way. Switch to upper_32_bits() which is more idiomatic and should conceptually be the same check. Cc: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210325083742.2334933-1-brauner@xxxxxxxxxx Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx> --- fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify_user.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify_user.c b/fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify_user.c index 842cccb4f7499..98289ace66fac 100644 --- a/fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify_user.c +++ b/fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify_user.c @@ -1268,7 +1268,7 @@ static int do_fanotify_mark(int fanotify_fd, unsigned int flags, __u64 mask, __func__, fanotify_fd, flags, dfd, pathname, mask); /* we only use the lower 32 bits as of right now. */ - if (mask & ((__u64)0xffffffff << 32)) + if (upper_32_bits(mask)) return -EINVAL; if (flags & ~FANOTIFY_MARK_FLAGS) -- 2.43.0
