From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 525BDC4360C for ; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 17:38:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17AE0222CC for ; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 17:38:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=oracle.com header.i=@oracle.com header.b="i/Yc2JrH" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727737AbfIZRiv (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Sep 2019 13:38:51 -0400 Received: from userp2130.oracle.com ([156.151.31.86]:52498 "EHLO userp2130.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727707AbfIZRiv (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Sep 2019 13:38:51 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (userp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x8QHYoRV063916; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 17:38:48 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=date : from : to : subject : message-id : references : mime-version : content-type : in-reply-to; s=corp-2019-08-05; bh=xXuiH8CyaQBexTKpBACTYfZ09vrd9+J+1xx9PMD6840=; b=i/Yc2JrHaDfiNava9MGU8ulyEex2Bj46llZF+zEW5pltCJ/Su9rSdKwqbrGp/BF93pBx zNYZBz0yoi3qi7GJ8xTaJ7OGihILtPUgLUtuBR2BEJWd/sOwiKuuFX8ZSOw4yP4mCVSk qhKwJjK9XZ9b5y9Py+S9Y/iMRSqPmnSJhqT8ozpEp7lUNIvs6JbJK6P5/kGGkemohDRg D6pRoPvut4HI/bppCptTtvgwUfSi/ngp72Yu0FRV5JBuTP1AU91wbJ/ROPMaPjp83tNc 5/Jw6hueanSHnxjrPMgqbmJPlUGi691DFwuozpBJihue7GUHLdRq7zKHLUwSDRzjFO// qg== Received: from userp3030.oracle.com (userp3030.oracle.com [156.151.31.80]) by userp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2v5b9u5cq1-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 26 Sep 2019 17:38:48 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (userp3030.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp3030.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x8QHYG24119839; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 17:38:48 GMT Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by userp3030.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2v8yjx2pda-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 26 Sep 2019 17:38:48 +0000 Received: from abhmp0013.oracle.com (abhmp0013.oracle.com [141.146.116.19]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x8QHckSC027499; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 17:38:47 GMT Received: from localhost (/67.169.218.210) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 10:38:46 -0700 Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2019 10:38:43 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: sandeen@sandeen.net, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfs_db: btheight should check geometry more carefully Message-ID: <20190926173843.GD9916@magnolia> References: <156944764785.303060.15428657522073378525.stgit@magnolia> <156944765385.303060.16945955453073433913.stgit@magnolia> <20190926091147.dbjrf5i7rfgmzehb@pegasus.maiolino.io> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190926091147.dbjrf5i7rfgmzehb@pegasus.maiolino.io> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9392 signatures=668685 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1908290000 definitions=main-1909260147 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9392 signatures=668685 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1908290000 definitions=main-1909260147 Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 11:11:48AM +0200, Carlos Maiolino wrote: > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 02:40:53PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > From: Darrick J. Wong > > > > The btheight command needs to check user-supplied geometry more > > carefully so that we don't hit floating point exceptions. > > > > Coverity-id: 1453661, 1453659 > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong > > --- > > > > Patch looks good, but. > > > > + if (record_size > blocksize) { > > + fprintf(stderr, > > + _("%s: record size must be less than %u bytes.\n"), > > Couldn't this message maybe be better saying "less than current blocksize"? > Saying it is less than X bytes sounds kind of meaningless, requiring a > trip to the code to understand what exactly 'bytes' mean here. > > Maybe something like: > > _("%s: record size must be less than current block size (%u).\n"), I think I'll change that to 'selected' from 'current' since the caller can change the block size with -b, but otherwise I agree. --D > > Same for the next two. > > > + tag, blocksize); > > + goto out; > > + } > > + > > + if (key_size > blocksize) { > > + fprintf(stderr, > > + _("%s: key size must be less than %u bytes.\n"), > > + tag, blocksize); > > + goto out; > > + } > > + > > + if (ptr_size > blocksize) { > > + fprintf(stderr, > > + _("%s: pointer size must be less than %u bytes.\n"), > > + tag, blocksize); > > + goto out; > > + } > > + > > p = strtok(NULL, ":"); > > if (p) { > > fprintf(stderr, > > @@ -211,13 +244,24 @@ report( > > int ret; > > > > ret = construct_records_per_block(tag, blocksize, records_per_block); > > - if (ret) { > > - printf(_("%s: Unable to determine records per block.\n"), > > - tag); > > + if (ret) > > return; > > - } > > > > if (report_what & REPORT_MAX) { > > + if (records_per_block[0] < 2) { > > + fprintf(stderr, > > +_("%s: cannot calculate best case scenario due to leaf geometry underflow.\n"), > > + tag); > > + return; > > + } > > + > > + if (records_per_block[1] < 4) { > > + fprintf(stderr, > > +_("%s: cannot calculate best case scenario due to node geometry underflow.\n"), > > + tag); > > + return; > > + } > > + > > printf( > > _("%s: best case per %u-byte block: %u records (leaf) / %u keyptrs (node)\n"), > > tag, blocksize, records_per_block[0], > > @@ -230,6 +274,20 @@ _("%s: best case per %u-byte block: %u records (leaf) / %u keyptrs (node)\n"), > > records_per_block[0] /= 2; > > records_per_block[1] /= 2; > > > > + if (records_per_block[0] < 1) { > > + fprintf(stderr, > > +_("%s: cannot calculate worst case scenario due to leaf geometry underflow.\n"), > > + tag); > > + return; > > + } > > + > > + if (records_per_block[1] < 2) { > > + fprintf(stderr, > > +_("%s: cannot calculate worst case scenario due to node geometry underflow.\n"), > > + tag); > > + return; > > + } > > + > > printf( > > _("%s: worst case per %u-byte block: %u records (leaf) / %u keyptrs (node)\n"), > > tag, blocksize, records_per_block[0], > > @@ -284,8 +342,26 @@ btheight_f( > > } > > } > > > > - if (argc == optind || blocksize <= 0 || blocksize > INT_MAX || > > - nr_records == 0) { > > + if (nr_records == 0) { > > + fprintf(stderr, > > +_("Number of records must be greater than zero.\n")); > > + return 0; > > + } > > + > > + if (blocksize > INT_MAX) { > > + fprintf(stderr, > > +_("The largest block size this command will consider is %u bytes.\n"), > > + INT_MAX); > > + return 0; > > + } > > + > > + if (blocksize < 128) { > > + fprintf(stderr, > > +_("The smallest block size this command will consider is 128 bytes.\n")); > > + return 0; > > + } > > + > > + if (argc == optind) { > > btheight_help(); > > return 0; > > } > > > > -- > Carlos >