From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31ED8ECAAA3 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 15:54:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1344634AbiHZPya (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Aug 2022 11:54:30 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:41246 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1344562AbiHZPy3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Aug 2022 11:54:29 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-x535.google.com (mail-pg1-x535.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::535]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 930D8D076E for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 08:54:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x535.google.com with SMTP id w13so1743187pgq.7 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 08:54:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc; bh=K3Xwfjtqcy08Dh4Uowyc7RheG//QPqDKPMV3mjxAE+A=; b=eJpog3UOd1kK1ruRtiGy9VSitgjWRSf/ss3vCIDaJmaVA5Ncev2d30+JIg7f65OjpD WALY4zVMYTBt4XMWuBijgrXn/lRdUbeH0spbUeZXrpzrH54F/r6ECXrEEYXYfCfKbrDv MfwWpWGRMvbr4Y9QuJe7E1awB12ssyxRf9M8bSsTTKYan0phk3lhhIgMjXdV7T1cREnn +ZMMx74LpVrbuo8KxsQKqRo8CjDILzaKZZopufGeapzQtVIWPEZ9y333UQo95XxgP8uT Y+4Gk0PtoIdbGuExq90ZmwTbUZ1TtDbA4WI2cl66rZTRZylHkez2VZ90M7flX4IzY3Lx Xw2g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=K3Xwfjtqcy08Dh4Uowyc7RheG//QPqDKPMV3mjxAE+A=; b=jNxWSSvk4Xt38t1Pmzb0lwSdqGIRd4AkXkB4clv/Ly/j6pmVVvUq2UM3gWKf4yKEw6 WuJtpA+46QK2xLD7zrQTPuGCa5OYTki9h0z62D1vk/TTQferLwiYm/DOeHlRgoc4xo32 9RPRu+/1i5LUckVI6vt83vU4vFL09Vyg+5SotkNeiKrBY4u/GQNl2Wt80vVGawnqgawz 1ZfHYvFXMnmvd5s6QJlSj6uLe889980jb+fI21cPMZUE9ZTUlK0VIEnvYzjY+gXwF7c0 Ugv7p9YUOWFsnxC6CB8mEEf0rO0YvPrQqOWQbcPjlVV/dbn3COk8JOVzi1rSHDSJD4em STsg== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo2gEX5d4xSs1xNkCLmKpzno5Y6rlYaJboAw7k9vbOKFat7UHA+S zG7kSQq7OMw0O2E6fntbPQ0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR5hFRNNmooUkl8v4ORBlsY6PUV3mY8lhREwZSxyQddlRDCXYJvn1Qo2MkKBnHIbIo8ziEpxqg== X-Received: by 2002:a63:6ac3:0:b0:41d:17dc:eb66 with SMTP id f186-20020a636ac3000000b0041d17dceb66mr3658382pgc.384.1661529268056; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 08:54:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([36.112.195.70]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x14-20020a170902ec8e00b0016be527753bsm1772906plg.264.2022.08.26.08.54.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 26 Aug 2022 08:54:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Hawkins Jiawei To: yin31149@gmail.com Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, anton@tuxera.com, chenxiaosong2@huawei.com, dan.carpenter@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ntfs-dev@lists.sourceforge.net, syzbot+5f8dcabe4a3b2c51c607@syzkaller.appspotmail.com, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] ntfs: change check order in ntfs_attr_find Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 23:54:05 +0800 Message-Id: <20220826155405.7506-1-yin31149@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.25.1 In-Reply-To: <20220826154231.6634-1-yin31149@gmail.com> References: <20220826154231.6634-1-yin31149@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 at 23:49, Hawkins Jiawei wrote: > > > > > Btw, this was in the original code, but those casts are ugly. Ideally > > there would be some way to get rid of them. But otherwise at least > > put a space after the u8. "(u8 *)a < (u8 *)ctx->mrec". > > > > > u8 *name_end = (u8 *)a + le16_to_cpu(a->name_offset) + > > > a->name_length * sizeof(ntfschar); > > > - if ((u8*)a < (u8*)ctx->mrec || (u8*)a > mrec_end || > > > - name_end > mrec_end) > > > + if (name_end > mrec_end) > > > break; > > > > regards, > > dan carpenter > So maybe I can try to refactor these codes. But I wonder if this can be > done in a seperate bug Sorry for the typing error. I mean refactoring these code in another seperate patch seems better.