From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D56D47F55 for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 08:48:10 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8F74304039 for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 06:48:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [63.231.237.45]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id t18WgAx3ZdQ3zGow for ; Fri, 09 Oct 2015 06:48:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] xfs_logprint: fix some unaligned accesses References: <56170906.5090301@redhat.com> <5617098E.9090102@sandeen.net> <20151009132440.GD27982@bfoster.bfoster> From: Eric Sandeen Message-ID: <5617C598.6010009@sandeen.net> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 08:48:08 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151009132440.GD27982@bfoster.bfoster> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Brian Foster Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On 10/9/15 8:24 AM, Brian Foster wrote: > On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 07:25:50PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> This routine had a fair bit of gyration to avoid unaligned accesses, >> but didn't fix them all. Fix some more spotted at runtime by libubsan. >> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen >> --- >> logprint/log_misc.c | 18 +++++++++++++++--- >> repair/btree.c | 1 + >> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/logprint/log_misc.c b/logprint/log_misc.c >> index d76145c..6cd249a 100644 >> --- a/logprint/log_misc.c >> +++ b/logprint/log_misc.c >> @@ -325,7 +325,11 @@ xlog_print_trans_buffer(char **ptr, int len, int *i, int num_ops) >> } >> super_block = 0; >> } else if (be32_to_cpu(*(__be32 *)(*ptr)) == XFS_AGI_MAGIC) { >> - agi = (xfs_agi_t *)(*ptr); >> + struct xfs_agi agi_s; >> + >> + /* memmove because *ptr may not be 8-byte aligned */ >> + memmove(&agi_s, *ptr, sizeof(struct xfs_agi)); >> + agi = &agi_s; > > Nit: could we either define the new variables in the same scope as the > pointer (either here or at the top of the function), or just ditch the > pointers altogether? Let me see how that looks, sure. >> printf(_("AGI Buffer: XAGI ")); >> /* >> * v4 filesystems only contain the fields before the uuid. > ... >> diff --git a/repair/btree.c b/repair/btree.c >> index 66fb40b..e31e67a 100644 >> --- a/repair/btree.c >> +++ b/repair/btree.c >> @@ -230,6 +230,7 @@ btree_get_next( >> } >> if (level == 0) { >> if (key) { >> + /* XXXX what if index past MAX? What if no next? */ > > Unintentional hunk? Yeah, dammit, I thought I removed that, sorry. Thanks, -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs