From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Yuntao Wang <yuntao.wang@linux.dev>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/file: fix the check in find_next_fd()
Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 20:03:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240529190328.GP2118490@ZenIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240529160656.209352-1-yuntao.wang@linux.dev>
On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 12:06:56AM +0800, Yuntao Wang wrote:
> The maximum possible return value of find_next_zero_bit(fdt->full_fds_bits,
> maxbit, bitbit) is maxbit. This return value, multiplied by BITS_PER_LONG,
> gives the value of bitbit, which can never be greater than maxfd, it can
> only be equal to maxfd at most, so the following check 'if (bitbit > maxfd)'
> will never be true.
>
> Moreover, when bitbit equals maxfd, it indicates that there are no unused
> fds, and the function can directly return.
>
> Fix this check.
Hmm... The patch is correct, AFAICS. I _think_ what happened is that
Linus decided to play it safe around the last word. In the reality
->max_fds is always a multiple of BITS_PER_LONG, so there's no boundary
effects - a word can not cross the ->max_fds boundary, so "no zero
bits in full_fds_bits under max_fds/BITS_PER_LONG" does mean there's
no point checking in range starting at round_down(max_fds, BITS_PER_LONG).
Perhaps a comment along the lines of
unsigned int maxfd = fdt->max_fds; // always a multiple of BITS_PER_LONG
would be useful in there...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-29 19:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-29 16:06 [PATCH] fs/file: fix the check in find_next_fd() Yuntao Wang
2024-05-29 16:22 ` Jan Kara
2024-05-29 19:03 ` Al Viro [this message]
2024-05-30 1:50 ` Yuntao Wang
2024-05-30 7:12 ` Christian Brauner
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=20240529190328.GP2118490@ZenIV \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yuntao.wang@linux.dev \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).