On Tue, 6 Sep 2011, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 04:33:25PM +0200, Lukas Czerner wrote: > > In xfs_ioc_trim it is possible that start+len might overflow. Fix it by > > decrementing the len so that start+len equals to the file system size in > > the worst case. > > The idea of the check looks reasonable, but I think it needs to be done > a bit different. Was this caught by the new testcase you just sent? Actually I have found the problem in other file systems too (ext4 and btrfs) while doing test similar to the one sent recently to xfstests. Then I fixed the problems, and then I have created the xfstests test for it so it is clear what the correct behaviour should look like. So yes, the testcase would have caught the problem. > > > + xfs_fsblock_t max_blks = XFS_MAX_DBLOCKS(&(mp->m_sb)); > > XFS_MAX_DBLOCKS is the maximum number of blocks that the given > geometry could support. But the last AG could be shorter than the > others. I think you really want to check against mp->m_sb.sb_dblocks. > ah, ok, I'll change that. Thanks! -Lukas _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
