From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>,
Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Cc: Ming Lei <ming.lei@caonical.com>, qemu-stable@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] block: fix big write
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 18:04:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5481E5A5.5040505@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5481E566.8070108@redhat.com>
On 05/12/2014 18:03, Max Reitz wrote:
> On 2014-12-05 at 17:15, Ming Lei wrote:
>> From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@caonical.com>
>>
>> QEMU block should have supported to read/write at most
>> 0x7fffff * 512 bytes, unfortunately INT_MAX is used to check
>> bytes in both bdrv_co_do_writev() and bdrv_check_byte_request(),
>> so cause write failure if nr_sectors is equal or more
>> than 0x400000.
>>
>> There are still other INT_MAX usages in block.c, and they might
>> need to change to UINT_MAX too in future, but at least
>> this patch's change can make SCSI WRITE SAME 16 workable.
>>
>> Cc: qemu-stable@nongnu.org
>> Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@caonical.com>
>> ---
>> block.c | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/block.c b/block.c
>> index a612594..ddc18c2 100644
>> --- a/block.c
>> +++ b/block.c
>> @@ -2607,7 +2607,7 @@ static int
>> bdrv_check_byte_request(BlockDriverState *bs, int64_t offset,
>> {
>> int64_t len;
>> - if (size > INT_MAX) {
>> + if (size > UINT_MAX) {
>> return -EIO;
>> }
>> @@ -3420,7 +3420,7 @@ static int coroutine_fn
>> bdrv_co_do_writev(BlockDriverState *bs,
>> int64_t sector_num, int nb_sectors, QEMUIOVector *qiov,
>> BdrvRequestFlags flags)
>> {
>> - if (nb_sectors < 0 || nb_sectors > (INT_MAX >> BDRV_SECTOR_BITS)) {
>> + if (nb_sectors < 0 || nb_sectors > (UINT_MAX >> BDRV_SECTOR_BITS)) {
>> return -EINVAL;
>> }
>>
>
> This is intentional so a byte length can be stored in an integer. This
> is a pretty bad design decision, but we have to live with it until we
> really fix the block layer regarding the type lengths are stored in.
No problem, let's fix SCSI (the correct way, which is not the patch
posted so far :)).
Paolo
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-05 17:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-05 16:15 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] block: fix big write Ming Lei
2014-12-05 16:33 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-12-08 7:19 ` Ming Lei
2014-12-09 17:45 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-12-10 1:41 ` Ming Lei
2014-12-10 9:56 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-12-10 12:23 ` Ming Lei
2014-12-10 12:55 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-12-10 14:35 ` Ming Lei
2014-12-10 15:02 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-12-10 15:47 ` Ming Lei
2014-12-10 16:44 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-12-05 17:03 ` Max Reitz
2014-12-05 17:04 ` Paolo Bonzini [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=5481E5A5.5040505@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=ming.lei@canonical.com \
--cc=ming.lei@caonical.com \
--cc=mreitz@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-stable@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@redhat.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.