From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C6F2C5231; Fri, 17 May 2024 01:32:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.50.34 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715909555; cv=none; b=i94SL7PR2pGzBn1weKENsulgUsX/TEinfi4W1YOClSxDpp3tVBcna4yxPfTMEBdoN3OSlkwPFXz5IU8ed+HAGJ5zjRz8eMJ1pHw5LQbVCwpgjzjFrvvdFIsFZ0Hx0FcDBuEwjHeVPvoIo1qZcLLyeZ5ikCKzXUA4tR6PhISgKoo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715909555; c=relaxed/simple; bh=9c0s2GKvvOfQ23LJ52vwKqyEr/KuQAz47cH8vvVFxlg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=vDhHg2fMo3aZ8VArVGw18ug/M84WP96BkKwahvE109Rhu0PlyEaxpMXlkBlDRo+UnWBI7r3lAkmRuLYcPvBz1klX1sfw47ovCTgXITNPmQmCWhKtEwkegppSd8cNyWZ5K0PTQlFy6yvwQ1dwcR/EiOVUgimsitaIEH5wuZh+5vw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=LFENJQ1o; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.50.34 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="LFENJQ1o" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=RuIWX4aNEFSWmvrH04EyeppZrNqXLtjq0nP4g1IH03k=; b=LFENJQ1onu7hYhFRYkXVF7Q0zx ImNyORhjT/cgVvwf3MJc+na5tdNTi0tDbZVI7Y+WPJoVxze4O8KDxFfkv2D01XRt5X2xD/lenE4vg TpyaH7zW0kZoh4gYVQS5lG03aLaFTLV6VQveQFuIdWYzeA6k8AjvkimKJkzsNl+lUjlc2Q1eLn/4E L3CtXmTier2GGHifoytAx+9+8nJ11m7lCCiwiMqup411z+cotrQR2tS9hgoLrhn8d4f+OU1ETXI5g 5aeYHxe5xACKtmL2E2AbuKw69PykicOc6BkVNfLePjiCRS3vMaZydZ2gOvZypa99+Xg1FcsDo/5yL SBQObwiA==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1s7mSI-0000000CSax-3f4J; Fri, 17 May 2024 01:32:18 +0000 Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 02:32:18 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Al Viro Cc: Justin Stitt , Christian Brauner , Jan Kara , Nick Desaulniers , Nathan Chancellor , Bill Wendling , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] fs: fix unintentional arithmetic wraparound in offset calculation Message-ID: References: <20240517-b4-sio-read_write-v3-1-f180df0a19e6@google.com> <20240517012647.GN2118490@ZenIV> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240517012647.GN2118490@ZenIV> On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 02:26:47AM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 02:13:22AM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 12:29:06AM +0000, Justin Stitt wrote: > > > When running syzkaller with the newly reintroduced signed integer > > > overflow sanitizer we encounter this report: > > > > why do you keep saying it's unintentional? it's clearly intended. > > Because they are short on actual bugs to be found by their tooling > and attempt to inflate the sound/noise rate; therefore, every time > when overflow _IS_ handled correctly, it must have been an accident - > we couldn't have possibly done the analysis correctly. And if somebody > insists that they _are_ capable of basic math, they must be dishonest. > So... "unintentional" it's going to be. > > Math is hard, mmkay? > > Al, more than slightly annoyed by that aspect of the entire thing... Yes, some of the patches I've seen floating past actually seem nice, but the vast majority just seem like make-work. And the tone is definitely inappropriate.