From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: potential argument order bug in fs/xfs/xfs_dir2_node.c:xfs_dir2_leafn_unbalance
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2013 13:11:28 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130905031128.GZ23571@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130905023818.GA10694@redhat.com>
On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 10:38:18PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> I'm picking through some of the bugs in coverity's database,
> and I came across this one, which I'm unsure of..
>
> In xfs_dir2_leafn_unbalance we have this code..
>
> 1583 if (xfs_dir2_leafn_order(save_blk->bp, drop_blk->bp))
> 1584 xfs_dir3_leafn_moveents(args, drop_blk->bp, &drophdr, dents, 0,
> 1585 save_blk->bp, &savehdr, sents, 0,
> 1586 drophdr.count);
> 1587 else
> 1588 xfs_dir3_leafn_moveents(args, drop_blk->bp, &drophdr, dents, 0,
> 1589 save_blk->bp, &savehdr, sents,
> 1590 savehdr.count, drophdr.count);
>
> The issue that coverity picked up in both cases, is that 'sents' and 'dents' are in
> a different order to how the xfs_dir3_leafn_moveents function expects them.
What does "order" mean to coverity? Is it really complaining about
function parameters being ordered (src, dst) rather than (dst, src)?
Or is it detecting that we are passing parameters names (dxxx, sxxx)
into a function that declares those parameters (syyy, dyyy) and it
throws based on that?
In more detail, the function prototype is effectively
xfs_dir3_leafn_moveents(source, destination, count), and so in both
cases here objects are being moved from the block being dropped
(freed) to the block being saved (merged block).
What the xfs_dir2_leafn_order() call tells us is whether the objects
in the drop block get inserted into the save block before or after
the objects in the save block. i.e. if we are merging from the left
or right sibling....
So I don't see that there's a problem here.
> Is this intentional ? If so I'll mark it as such in their db.
The code looks fine to me...
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-05 3:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-05 2:38 potential argument order bug in fs/xfs/xfs_dir2_node.c:xfs_dir2_leafn_unbalance Dave Jones
2013-09-05 3:11 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2013-09-05 3:24 ` Dave Jones
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=20130905031128.GZ23571@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/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