From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Kleikamp Subject: Re: [patch 146/233] fix possible PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT overflows Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 13:37:56 -0600 Message-ID: <1136749077.10599.2.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com> References: <200601080903.k0893GE9015082@shell0.pdx.osdl.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, aia21@cantab.net, blaisorblade@yahoo.it, dhowells@redhat.com, dwmw2@infradead.org, green@linuxhacker.ru, hch@lst.de, jdike@addtoit.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, miklos@szeredi.hu, neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au, reiserfs-dev@namesys.com, rmk@arm.linux.org.uk, trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no, zippel@linux-m68k.org Return-path: Received: from e35.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.153]:14790 "EHLO e35.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161133AbWAHTiB (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jan 2006 14:38:01 -0500 Received: from westrelay02.boulder.ibm.com (westrelay02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.11]) by e35.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k08Jc1w9008948 for ; Sun, 8 Jan 2006 14:38:01 -0500 Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (d03av01.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.167]) by westrelay02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VERS6.8) with ESMTP id k08JabiJ161108 for ; Sun, 8 Jan 2006 12:36:37 -0700 Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k08JbxEG020345 for ; Sun, 8 Jan 2006 12:38:01 -0700 To: akpm@osdl.org In-Reply-To: <200601080903.k0893GE9015082@shell0.pdx.osdl.net> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 01:03 -0800, akpm@osdl.org wrote: > From: Andrew Morton > > We've had two instances recently of overflows when doing > > 64_bit_value = (32_bit_value << PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT) > > I did a tree-wide grep of `<<.*PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT' and this is the result. > > - afs_rxfs_fetch_descriptor.offset is of type off_t, which seems broken. > > - jfs and jffs are limited to 4GB anyway. What makes you say jfs is limited to 4GB? No matter. There shouldn't be any problem in jfs anyway. -- David Kleikamp IBM Linux Technology Center