linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jim Houston <jim.houston@ccur.com>
To: Hoang-Nam Nguyen <hnguyen@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, openib-general@openib.org,
	Stefan Roscher <ossrosch@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, raisch@de.ibm.com,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: idr_get_new_above() limitation?
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 20:31:40 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1183422700.3130.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200707021919.27251.hnguyen@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On Mon, 2007-07-02 at 19:19 +0200, Hoang-Nam Nguyen wrote:

> i=3fffffff token=3fffffff t=000000003fffffff
> i=40000000 token=40000000 t=0000000000000000
> Invalid object 0000000000000000. Expected 40000000
> 
> That means token 0x40000000 seems to be the "upper boundary" of idr_find().
> However the behaviour is not consistent in that it was returned by
> idr_get_new_above().

Hi Nam,

Yes this is a bug.  Thanks for the great test module.

The problem is in idr_get_new_above_int() in the loop which
adds new layers to the top of the radix tree.  It is failing
the "layers < (MAX_LEVEL - 1)" test.  It doesn't allocate the
new layer but still calls sub_alloc() which relies on having
the new layer properly constructed.  I believe that it is
allocating the slot which corresponds to id = 0.

I believe this is an off by one error in calculating the
MAX_LEVEL value.  I will do a more careful review and post 
a fix in the next day or so.  I have been in Ottawa for OLS.
I'm flying home tomorrow.

Jim Houston - Concurrent Computer Corp.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-07-03  0:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-07-02 17:19 idr_get_new_above() limitation? Hoang-Nam Nguyen
2007-07-02 22:56 ` Andrew Morton
2007-07-03  0:31 ` Jim Houston [this message]
2007-07-04 14:11   ` Hoang-Nam Nguyen
2007-07-10 20:05     ` [PATCH] fix idr_get_new_above id alias bugs Jim Houston
2007-07-11 19:27       ` Hoang-Nam Nguyen
2007-07-12 21:35       ` Andrew Morton
2007-07-12 21:56         ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-07-13  3:46         ` Tejun Heo

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=1183422700.3130.27.camel@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=jim.houston@ccur.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hnguyen@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=openib-general@openib.org \
    --cc=ossrosch@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=raisch@de.ibm.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).