From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Whitcroft Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] dm raid: fix compat_features validation Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 16:38:08 +0100 Message-ID: <20161011153808.nmyf6hafjaadcemw@brain> References: <20161011142835.11620-1-apw@canonical.com> <1c517f14-1234-7844-fc6a-cd1b9698fb8b@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1c517f14-1234-7844-fc6a-cd1b9698fb8b@redhat.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com To: Heinz Mauelshagen Cc: Mike Snitzer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, Shaohua Li , Alasdair Kergon List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 05:04:34PM +0200, Heinz Mauelshagen wrote: > > Andy, > > good catch. > > We should rather check for V190 support only in case any > compat feature flags are actually set. > > { > + if (le32_to_cpu(sb->compat_features) && > + le32_to_cpu(sb->compat_features) != FEATURE_FLAG_SUPPORTS_V190) > { > rs->ti->error = "Unable to assemble array: Unknown flag(s) > in compatible feature flags"; > return -EINVAL; > } If the feature flags are single bit combinations then I believe the below does check exactly that. Checking for no 1s outside of the expected features, caring not for the value of the valid bits: + if (le32_to_cpu(sb->compat_features) & ~(FEATURE_FLAG_SUPPORTS_V190)) { with the possibilty to or in additional feature bits as they are added. -apw