From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from va-2-37.ptr.blmpb.com (va-2-37.ptr.blmpb.com [209.127.231.37]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DEA13B3894 for ; Mon, 21 Sep 2026 07:17:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.127.231.37 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789975040; cv=none; b=ltKxGtFc3jmVJoY7zeEpQRW4dTm0oJjNVJd5dDNo9mEzML/hCDH1eTFbLaRH+drF/l2gHQ/BAV/Wr7Wx5lnPGqchdF0OTw8wN67QHiKMW2qLg2Ya0m+ACvd27DX+WAGi60Z5g95LvhKJkw1XHYpGb85m44diwQzHC8SUE+yKNo0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789975040; c=relaxed/simple; bh=AdLtWh1z6QO3Ome46MxIlyBvHsFvQEEZMU/S5jcXNn0=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:Date:To:From:Content-Type:Cc:Message-Id; b=X6rgMO3+4tAzgWGe5Hjh2vhFLGKK2u/L3icDDl9xws4W9QjbSCztGIgO1UufTkRFYI2Lu8ogVTKXJTlhqAOrDtCc6Vks9h3j9RZ2DMXuRpPE2oPbvT3vpnIHxG3LKjBXpqZaFEL++KqY9dDT4RY28+LDIcPROkW5zTlqPuAhnb4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=fnnas.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fnnas.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fnnas-com.20200927.dkim.feishu.cn header.i=@fnnas-com.20200927.dkim.feishu.cn header.b=BfoNdHa4; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.127.231.37 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=fnnas.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fnnas.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fnnas-com.20200927.dkim.feishu.cn header.i=@fnnas-com.20200927.dkim.feishu.cn header.b="BfoNdHa4" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=s1; d=fnnas-com.20200927.dkim.feishu.cn; t=1789975026; h=from:subject:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc: reply-to:content-type:mime-version:in-reply-to:message-id; bh=0g4OXxO3C65RzGyL+t5rsMRD15HoHvHc91bAoNov68E=; b=BfoNdHa4nTFTQTg5h2/zYrRT3Tdgh5F5a3u5pOcdJrvHM9nJ/t5eTU/7caA+S+zxO02Ll9 B5LS3rJ+gorrrtO0FjOHC7EVr3Nx2G2NJAMEZ5CH5PnkYARr6aGSucz5N52x6JlMbqoAeW hb9XuSq8B2xcJkOuPMul5mM7BEH7lMLyXGx5KzGE3+VV/envJw0bo53fC5LDgMiLNreV6p JyngyKgN+qtDg3+LWxS5YjvVEhKPesmBaoSgWbW4nUj9uSex6T9xU/qBVPOgUKjPc43MLl /edmbc5+iXPKyMdigKJdZdJej0yFjlLd18Btrb8QY/LFyTJQY6fBybgF/2s/6w== Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [PATCH v2 0/2] md/raid5: validate disk count before reshape assembly Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2026 15:16:51 +0800 Received: from fedora ([183.34.169.232]) by smtp.feishu.cn with ESMTPS; Mon, 21 Sep 2026 15:17:03 +0800 X-Lms-Return-Path: To: , , From: "Chen Cheng" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: X-Original-From: chencheng@fnnas.com Message-Id: X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.55.0 From: Chen Cheng The previous patch rejects raid4/5 arrays with too few disks in setup_conf(). During reshape assembly, raid5_run() still divides by the data-disk count before that check, so a crafted superblock can hit division by zero. Extract min_raid_disks() and reject invalid reshape geometries in raid5_run() first. v1 -> v2: - Added Link Chen Cheng (2): md/raid5: extract min_raid_disks() md/raid5: reject invalid reshape disks in raid5_run() drivers/md/raid5.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) -- 2.55.0