Linux block layer
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Coly Li" <colyli@fygo.io>
To: "Ramesh Adhikari" <adhikari.resume@gmail.com>
Cc: <axboe@kernel.dk>, <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	 <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>, <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
	 "kernel test robot" <lkp@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] badblocks: fix in-place round_up/round_down usage bug
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2026 23:16:32 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ak-7HLuHJ-5vJvFN@studio.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260709131904.596684-2-adhikari.resume@gmail.com>

On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 06:49:03PM +0800, Ramesh Adhikari wrote:
> rounddown() and roundup() do not modify their first argument in
> place; they return the rounded value. _badblocks_set(),
> _badblocks_clear() and badblocks_check() were calling them as
> bare statements and discarding the result, so 's' (and 'next'/
> 'target') were never actually rounded. Depending on the caller's
> alignment this can leave 'sectors' unchanged or, in the reported
> case, produce a range whose end never advances, causing
> _badblocks_check()/badblocks_check() to loop with a non-advancing
> cursor and stall the CPU (RCU stall) when called through the
> nvdimm ioctl path via nvdimm_clear_badblocks_region().
> 
> rounddown()/roundup() also do division/modulo on the sector_t
> (u64) operand, which requires libgcc helpers (__aeabi_uldivmod,
> __umoddi3) that are not linked into the kernel on 32-bit builds,
> breaking the build on arm/i386 (reported by kernel test robot).
> 
> Switch to round_down()/round_up() (include/linux/math.h), which
> are mask-based, assign their result back to the variable being
> rounded, and require no 64-bit division, fixing both the
> non-rounding bug and the 32-bit build breakage.
> 
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202604301231.IpPh4AiH-lkp@intel.com/
> Fixes: aa511ff8218b ("badblocks: switch to the improved badblock handling code")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Ramesh Adhikari <adhikari.resume@gmail.com>

It looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Coly Li <colyli@fygo.io>

Thanks.

Coly Li

> ---
>  block/badblocks.c | 12 ++++++------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/block/badblocks.c b/block/badblocks.c
> index ece64e76fe8..1f786b193fb 100644
> --- a/block/badblocks.c
> +++ b/block/badblocks.c
> @@ -857,8 +857,8 @@ static bool _badblocks_set(struct badblocks *bb, sector_t s, sector_t sectors,
>  		/* round the start down, and the end up */
>  		sector_t next = s + sectors;
>  
> -		rounddown(s, 1 << bb->shift);
> -		roundup(next, 1 << bb->shift);
> +		s = round_down(s, 1 << bb->shift);
> +		next = round_up(next, 1 << bb->shift);
>  		sectors = next - s;
>  	}
>  
> @@ -1071,8 +1071,8 @@ static bool _badblocks_clear(struct badblocks *bb, sector_t s, sector_t sectors)
>  		 * isn't than to think a block is not bad when it is.
>  		 */
>  		target = s + sectors;
> -		roundup(s, 1 << bb->shift);
> -		rounddown(target, 1 << bb->shift);
> +		s = round_up(s, 1 << bb->shift);
> +		target = round_down(target, 1 << bb->shift);
>  		sectors = target - s;
>  	}
>  
> @@ -1307,8 +1307,8 @@ int badblocks_check(struct badblocks *bb, sector_t s, sector_t sectors,
>  		/* round the start down, and the end up */
>  		sector_t target = s + sectors;
>  
> -		rounddown(s, 1 << bb->shift);
> -		roundup(target, 1 << bb->shift);
> +		s = round_down(s, 1 << bb->shift);
> +		target = round_up(target, 1 << bb->shift);
>  		sectors = target - s;
>  	}
>  
> -- 
> 2.43.0

  reply	other threads:[~2026-07-09 15:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-27 15:10 [PATCH] badblocks: fix infinite loop due to incorrect rounding and overflow Ramesh Adhikari
2026-04-27 15:12 ` Greg KH
2026-04-29 23:06 ` kernel test robot
2026-04-30  5:09 ` kernel test robot
2026-07-04 17:13 ` [PATCH v5] " Ramesh Adhikari
2026-07-09 10:25   ` Coly Li
2026-07-09 13:19     ` [PATCH v6 0/2] badblocks: fix infinite loop and validate sector range/shift Ramesh Adhikari
2026-07-09 13:19       ` [PATCH v6 1/2] badblocks: fix in-place round_up/round_down usage bug Ramesh Adhikari
2026-07-09 15:16         ` Coly Li [this message]
2026-07-09 13:19       ` [PATCH v6 2/2] badblocks: validate sector range and shift before rounding Ramesh Adhikari

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=ak-7HLuHJ-5vJvFN@studio.local \
    --to=colyli@fygo.io \
    --cc=adhikari.resume@gmail.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox