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 B236EC433F5 for ; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 16:25:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239090AbhLQQZN (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Dec 2021 11:25:13 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42836 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238005AbhLQQZM (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Dec 2021 11:25:12 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-x102e.google.com (mail-pj1-x102e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CF85C061574 for ; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 08:25:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pj1-x102e.google.com with SMTP id co15so2727666pjb.2 for ; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 08:25:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=i5b9PXwhAv6r3gLGUQSE4NSFBShDvIEQt7qaKbqdtRU=; b=oUkhRhxL7JjguwmmNEIfWI77z+V+UN9VccwOVfxMjGgLpOYWokci2tfIxVqsGczmST QMxe3fcL/DphTCa09VQqbosf4tTlsF0XqoP63h1S66W47QyQ+/igaI5OBfIzrmoKzzZe 3rigQueqD7rezcc5qugBXfwmqrFlKxNi/kkC/JbX+1OAlWk9Q61yzo7j1HGoE0aiE6jw Xu926yr+rLhSReYBvO4eo/NAZCRhPCevqQwOEr1CfukbfA8KVAWKEUmpA9SdGrHxNLno 0Ce8mhLfTrvVkgPVQRpxQnzMpq/vhaNNc5Y3vcJGeRHL16jD/J/GrzFJeflJ2nUkyDvG dFRQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=i5b9PXwhAv6r3gLGUQSE4NSFBShDvIEQt7qaKbqdtRU=; b=wgAxEMLQhReivevRHOANk90xU9rNZgG/c4CMlLnPJu+GVPsFCrLkCfyfIb2vTpR/+L m6BCDYI6d7zxizMcxMnSBdcoyCfqWnE326Q703eQt9yhbFI7jG4NED/Qg0g7ZtizgjCI 7srlDzbbj0LSMG/9F4RolnMRZCoZPrEczFZjzoQsg5B5zzDZqqbEPpms/rse4Am2se6D RnNBW3zXYZMssnCCBaFI+7GcQkMLennw1mOFn6/qctvvym0qFskDWiUK9XAEobhxAV4C 22zhdlF1nDNIGPRjOy1gzBY1jMkh8U7++vBMbnIc1k71gVxoLAml1XDL4f6f+4OFU3UN t/XA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532iQ45J5MEO3VuznFGJq839meov/7Y8z6OgBTOeOgRbx3Gxw1/v gKbUmHFVbD8umrVrRxWDj8t7iUS3MO/oAw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx3bmYolgmWDig8iyqAYOvSIoFRuQg5Rl3cmZdn7QGY7iyfQpRgeaMheRIczzz2i3SXX8XRsQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:950b:: with SMTP id t11mr13029826pjo.80.1639758311355; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 08:25:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2620:10d:c085:21c8::1321? ([2620:10d:c090:400::5:4398]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id nl16sm12921115pjb.13.2021.12.17.08.25.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 17 Dec 2021 08:25:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: use "unsigned long" for blk_validate_block_size() To: Tetsuo Handa , linux-block References: From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 09:25:08 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On 12/17/21 4:38 AM, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Use of "unsigned short" for loop_validate_block_size() is wrong [1], and > commit af3c570fb0df422b ("loop: Use blk_validate_block_size() to validate > block size") changed to use "unsigned int". > > However, since lo_simple_ioctl(LOOP_SET_BLOCK_SIZE) passes "unsigned long > arg" to loop_set_block_size(), blk_validate_block_size() can't validate > the upper 32bits on 64bits environment. A block size like 0x100000200 > should be rejected. Wouldn't it make more sense to validate that part on the loop side? A block size > 32-bit doesn't make any sense. -- Jens Axboe