From: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>
To: Jeff Liu <jeff.liu@oracle.com>
Cc: "xfs@oss.sgi.com" <xfs@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] xfs: fix the extent count when allocating an new indirection array entry
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 17:10:16 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131104231016.GR1935@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131031213624.GQ1935@sgi.com>
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 04:36:24PM -0500, Ben Myers wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 02:52:44PM +0800, Jeff Liu wrote:
> > From: Jie Liu <jeff.liu@oracle.com>
> >
> > At xfs_iext_add(), if extent(s) are being appended to the last page in
> > the indirection array and the new extent(s) don't fit in the page, the
> > number of extents(erp->er_extcount) in a new allocated entry should be
> > the minimum value between count and XFS_LINEAR_EXTS, instead of count.
> >
> > For now, there is no existing test case can demonstrates a problem with
> > the er_extcount being set incorrectly here, but it obviously like a bug.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jie Liu <jeff.liu@oracle.com>
> > ---
> > v2: * Declare count to uint as it will be decreased to 0 and XFS_LINEAR_EXTS
> > can be uint because of a case in the macro.
> > * Convert MIN() to min().
> > * Revise the commits log to indicate there is no existing test case can
> > reflect this issue for future tracking up.
> >
> > fs/xfs/xfs_inode_fork.c | 9 ++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode_fork.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode_fork.c
> > index 22c9837..cfee14a 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode_fork.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode_fork.c
> > @@ -1021,15 +1021,14 @@ xfs_iext_add(
> > * the next index needed in the indirection array.
> > */
> > else {
> > - int count = ext_diff;
> > + uint count = ext_diff;
> >
> > while (count) {
> > erp = xfs_iext_irec_new(ifp, erp_idx);
> > - erp->er_extcount = count;
> > - count -= MIN(count, (int)XFS_LINEAR_EXTS);
> > - if (count) {
> > + erp->er_extcount = min(count, XFS_LINEAR_EXTS);
> > + count -= erp->er_extcount;
> > + if (count)
> > erp_idx++;
> > - }
> > }
> > }
> > }
>
> Really nice find. So there is potential for incorrect er_extcount and
> er_extoff when adding > 256 extents to the end of the indirection array. You'd
> think we'd be seeing some side effects since xfs_iext_idx_to_irec uses them in
> it's binary search.
>
> Reviewed-by: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>
Applied this. Thanks Jeff.
-Ben
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-04 23:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-25 6:52 [PATCH v2] xfs: fix the extent count when allocating an new indirection array entry Jeff Liu
2013-10-31 21:36 ` Ben Myers
2013-11-04 23:10 ` Ben Myers [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20131104231016.GR1935@sgi.com \
--to=bpm@sgi.com \
--cc=jeff.liu@oracle.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.