Re: [PATCH v12 2/3] block: change annotation of rdb_CylBlocks in affs_hardblocks.h

[Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com>]

Hi Geert,

Am 18.06.2023 um 19:51 schrieb Geert Uytterhoeven:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 5:10 AM Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Am 17.06.2023 um 23:08 schrieb Geert Uytterhoeven:
>>> On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 12:36 AM Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> The Amiga partition parser module uses signed int for partition sector
>>>> address and count, which will overflow for disks larger than 1 TB.
>>>>
>>>> Use u64 as type for sector address and size to allow using disks up to
>>>> 2 TB without LBD support, and disks larger than 2 TB with LBD. The RBD
>>>> format allows to specify disk sizes up to 2^128 bytes (though native
>>>> OS limitations reduce this somewhat, to max 2^68 bytes), so check for
>>>> u64 overflow carefully to protect against overflowing sector_t.
>>>>
>>>> This bug was reported originally in 2012, and the fix was created by
>>>> the RDB author, Joanne Dow <jdow@earthlink.net>. A patch had been
>>>> discussed and reviewed on linux-m68k at that time but never officially
>>>> submitted (now resubmitted as patch 1 of this series).
>>>>
>>>> Patch 3 (this series) adds additional error checking and warning
>>>> messages. One of the error checks now makes use of the previously
>>>> unused rdb_CylBlocks field, which causes a 'sparse' warning
>>>> (cast to restricted __be32).
>>>>
>>>> Annotate all 32 bit fields in affs_hardblocks.h as __be32, as the
>>>> on-disk format of RDB and partition blocks is always big endian.
>>>>
>>>> Reported-by: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@lichtvoll.de>
>>>> Closes: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43511
>>>> Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2")
>>>> Message-ID: <201206192146.09327.Martin@lichtvoll.de>
>>>> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 5.2
>>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
>>
>> Thanks - now I notice the patch title for this one doesn't fit too well
>> anymore.
>>
>> Would a change of title mess up the common patch tracking tools?
>
> You mean changing one patch subject in v13?

Correct.

> Nah, happens all the time, so the tooling should handle that fine.

OK - I need to add your review tag anyway.

Cheers,

	Michael
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
>                         Geert
>