From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Frank Denis \(Jedi/Sector One\)" Subject: Re: [PATCH] [resend] VFS locking errors on max offset edge cases Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 02:08:03 +0100 Message-ID: <20041224010825.GA28608@c9x.org> References: <1103842880.4702.87.camel@w-bwa3.beaverton.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: matthew@wil.cx, linux-kernel , linux-fsdevel Return-path: Received: from gw.c9x.org ([213.41.131.17]:32286 "HELO nerim.mx.42-networks.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261362AbULXBI0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:08:26 -0500 To: Bruce Allan Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1103842880.4702.87.camel@w-bwa3.beaverton.ibm.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 23, 2004 at 03:01:20PM -0800, Bruce Allan wrote: > Patch created against 2.6.10-rc3, tested on ppc64 with both > _FILE_OFFSET_BITS set to 32 and 64. > diff -Nurp -X dontdiff linux-2.6.10-rc3-vanilla/fs/compat.c linux-2.6.10-rc3/fs/compat.c > + if ((cmd == F_GETLK) && > + ((f.l_start > COMPAT_OFF_T_MAX) || > + ((f.l_start + f.l_len - 1) > COMPAT_OFF_T_MAX))) { > + ret = -EOVERFLOW; > + break; > + } > + } One extra }, > + if ((cmd == F_GETLK64) && > + ((f.l_start > COMPAT_LOFF_T_MAX) || > + ((f.l_start + f.l_len - 1) > COMPAT_LOFF_T_MAX))) { > + ret = -EOVERFLOW; > + break; > + } > + } Another extra }. How could have this patch been tested?