> Anyway - bounds checking when we read from disk is a good thing! Absolutelt! Looks good modulo a few nitpicks below. Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c > index 4bffffe..a4a9e0e 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c > @@ -2209,6 +2209,10 @@ xfs_agf_verify( > be32_to_cpu(agf->agf_flcount) <= XFS_AGFL_SIZE(mp))) > return false; > > + if (!(be32_to_cpu(agf->agf_levels[XFS_BTNUM_BNO]) <= XFS_BTREE_MAXLEVELS && > + be32_to_cpu(agf->agf_levels[XFS_BTNUM_CNT]) <= XFS_BTREE_MAXLEVELS)) > + return false; Maybe it's just me, but negated numeric comparisms always confuse the hell out of me, why not simply: if (be32_to_cpu(agf->agf_levels[XFS_BTNUM_BNO]) > XFS_BTREE_MAXLEVELS) return false; if (be32_to_cpu(agf->agf_levels[XFS_BTNUM_CNT]) > XFS_BTREE_MAXLEVELS) return false; > --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ialloc.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ialloc.c > @@ -2051,6 +2051,8 @@ xfs_agi_verify( > if (!XFS_AGI_GOOD_VERSION(be32_to_cpu(agi->agi_versionnum))) > return false; > > + if (!(be32_to_cpu(agi->agi_level) <= XFS_BTREE_MAXLEVELS)) > + return false; Same here. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
