public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
To: Don Mullis <don.mullis@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] improve list_sort test
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2010 13:03:09 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1281261789.2384.11.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1281168645-18413-1-git-send-email-dedekind1@gmail.com>

On Sat, 2010-08-07 at 11:10 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> while hunting a non-existing bug in 'list_sort()', I've improved the
> 'list_sort_test()' function which tests the 'list_sort()' library call. Although
> at the end I found a bug in my code, but not in 'list_sort()', I think my
> clean-ups and improvements are worth merging because they make the test function
> better.

Actually, your 'list_sort()' version does have a problem. I found out
that it calls 'cmp(priv, a, b)' with 'a = b' sometimes, and in these
cases 'a' and 'b' can point to something which is not a valid element of
the original list. Probably a senitel or something like that.

It is easy to work around this by adding:

if (a == b)
	return 0;

in the 'cmp()' function, but this is nevertheless a bug (not too bad,
though) and should be fixed. Also, the fact that 'cmp()' is called with
'a==b' sometimes should be documented.

I'm CC-ing 2 other users of 'list_sort()' for head-ups (xfs, drm).

I've fixed assertions in UBIFS using the following patch:

===========================================================================

>From 3ea1708e2d0462dc8eaf1076ebf973d82700952b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2010 12:45:23 +0300
Subject: [PATCHv2 8/9] UBIFS: fix assertion warnings in comparison function

When running the integrity test ('integck' from mtd-utils) on current
UBIFS on 2.6.35, I see that assertions in UBIFS 'list_sort()' comparison
functions trigger sometimes, e.g.:

UBIFS assert failed in data_nodes_cmp at 132 (pid 28311)

My investigation showed that this happens when 'list_sort()' calls the 'cmp()'
function with equivalent arguments. In this case, the 'struct list_head'
parameter, passed to 'cmp()' is bogus, and it does not belong to any element in
the original list.

And this issue seems to be introduced by commit:

commit 835cc0c8477fdbc59e0217891d6f11061b1ac4e2
Author: Don Mullis <don.mullis@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri Mar 5 13:43:15 2010 -0800

It is easy to work around the issue by doing:

if (a == b)
	return 0;

in UBIFS. It works, but 'lib_sort()' should nevertheless be fixed. Although it
is harmless to have this piece of code in UBIFS.

This patch adds that code to both UBIFS 'cmp()' functions:
'data_nodes_cmp()' and 'nondata_nodes_cmp()'.

Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
---
 fs/ubifs/gc.c |    6 ++++++
 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ubifs/gc.c b/fs/ubifs/gc.c
index 8dbe36f..84ab9aa 100644
--- a/fs/ubifs/gc.c
+++ b/fs/ubifs/gc.c
@@ -125,6 +125,9 @@ int data_nodes_cmp(void *priv, struct list_head *a, struct list_head *b)
 	struct ubifs_scan_node *sa, *sb;
 
 	cond_resched();
+	if (a == b)
+		return 0;
+
 	sa = list_entry(a, struct ubifs_scan_node, list);
 	sb = list_entry(b, struct ubifs_scan_node, list);
 
@@ -165,6 +168,9 @@ int nondata_nodes_cmp(void *priv, struct list_head *a, struct list_head *b)
 	struct ubifs_scan_node *sa, *sb;
 
 	cond_resched();
+	if (a == b)
+		return 0;
+
 	sa = list_entry(a, struct ubifs_scan_node, list);
 	sb = list_entry(b, struct ubifs_scan_node, list);
 
-- 
1.7.1.1



-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)


  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-08-08 10:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-08-07  8:10 [PATCH 0/6] improve list_sort test Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-07  8:10 ` [PATCH 1/6] lib/Kconfig.debug: add list_sort debugging switch Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-07  8:10 ` [PATCH 2/6] lib/list_sort: test: use more reasonable printk levels Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-07  8:10 ` [PATCH 3/6] lib/list_sort: test: use generic random32 Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-07  8:10 ` [PATCH 4/6] lib/list_sort: test: improve errors handling Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-07  8:10 ` [PATCH 5/6] lib/list_sort: test: unify test messages Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-07  8:10 ` [PATCH 6/6] lib/list_sort: test: check element addresses Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-08 10:03 ` Artem Bityutskiy [this message]
2010-08-08 19:31   ` [PATCH 0/6] improve list_sort test Don Mullis
2010-08-08 20:07     ` Don Mullis
2010-08-09  5:59       ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-21  9:56       ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-21 10:03       ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-21 10:06       ` [PATCH] lib/list_sort: do not pass bad pointers to cmp callback Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-21  9:32     ` [PATCH 0/6] improve list_sort test Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-21 10:22 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-21 16:59   ` don.mullis
2010-08-21 17:48     ` Artem Bityutskiy

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=1281261789.2384.11.camel@localhost \
    --to=dedekind1@gmail.com \
    --cc=airlied@linux.ie \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=don.mullis@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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