Message ID | 156685614992.2853532.4191470495720238021.stgit@magnolia (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Accepted |
Headers | show |
Series | xfs: fixes for 5.4 | expand |
On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 02:49:09PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com> > > In xfs_bmbt_diff_two_keys, we perform a signed int64_t subtraction with > two unsigned 64-bit quantities. If the second quantity is actually the > "maximum" key (all ones) as used in _query_all, the subtraction > effectively becomes addition of two positive numbers and the function > returns incorrect results. Fix this with explicit comparisons of the > unsigned values. Nobody needs this now, but the online repair patches > will need this to work properly. > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com> > --- > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c | 16 ++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c > index fbb18ba5d905..3c1a805b3775 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c > @@ -400,8 +400,20 @@ xfs_bmbt_diff_two_keys( > union xfs_btree_key *k1, > union xfs_btree_key *k2) > { > - return (int64_t)be64_to_cpu(k1->bmbt.br_startoff) - > - be64_to_cpu(k2->bmbt.br_startoff); > + uint64_t a = be64_to_cpu(k1->bmbt.br_startoff); > + uint64_t b = be64_to_cpu(k2->bmbt.br_startoff); > + > + /* > + * Note: This routine previously casted a and b to int64 and subtracted > + * them to generate a result. This lead to problems if b was the > + * "maximum" key value (all ones) being signed incorrectly, hence this > + * somewhat less efficient version. > + */ > + if (a > b) > + return 1; > + else if (b > a) > + return -1; No need for an else here, but otherwise OK. Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
On 8/26/19 6:15 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 02:49:09PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: >> From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com> >> >> In xfs_bmbt_diff_two_keys, we perform a signed int64_t subtraction with >> two unsigned 64-bit quantities. If the second quantity is actually the >> "maximum" key (all ones) as used in _query_all, the subtraction >> effectively becomes addition of two positive numbers and the function >> returns incorrect results. Fix this with explicit comparisons of the >> unsigned values. Nobody needs this now, but the online repair patches >> will need this to work properly. >> >> Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com> >> --- >> fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c | 16 ++++++++++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> >> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c >> index fbb18ba5d905..3c1a805b3775 100644 >> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c >> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c >> @@ -400,8 +400,20 @@ xfs_bmbt_diff_two_keys( >> union xfs_btree_key *k1, >> union xfs_btree_key *k2) >> { >> - return (int64_t)be64_to_cpu(k1->bmbt.br_startoff) - >> - be64_to_cpu(k2->bmbt.br_startoff); >> + uint64_t a = be64_to_cpu(k1->bmbt.br_startoff); >> + uint64_t b = be64_to_cpu(k2->bmbt.br_startoff); >> + >> + /* >> + * Note: This routine previously casted a and b to int64 and subtracted >> + * them to generate a result. This lead to problems if b was the >> + * "maximum" key value (all ones) being signed incorrectly, hence this >> + * somewhat less efficient version. >> + */ >> + if (a > b) >> + return 1; >> + else if (b > a) >> + return -1; > > No need for an else here, but otherwise OK. > > Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com> In fact having the else means the a == b case isn't handled, even if it should never happen, so might a static checker eventually complain about reaching the end of a non-void function? -Eric
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 08:01:16AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 8/26/19 6:15 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 02:49:09PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > >> From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com> > >> > >> In xfs_bmbt_diff_two_keys, we perform a signed int64_t subtraction with > >> two unsigned 64-bit quantities. If the second quantity is actually the > >> "maximum" key (all ones) as used in _query_all, the subtraction > >> effectively becomes addition of two positive numbers and the function > >> returns incorrect results. Fix this with explicit comparisons of the > >> unsigned values. Nobody needs this now, but the online repair patches > >> will need this to work properly. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com> > >> --- > >> fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c | 16 ++++++++++++++-- > >> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> > >> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c > >> index fbb18ba5d905..3c1a805b3775 100644 > >> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c > >> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c > >> @@ -400,8 +400,20 @@ xfs_bmbt_diff_two_keys( > >> union xfs_btree_key *k1, > >> union xfs_btree_key *k2) > >> { > >> - return (int64_t)be64_to_cpu(k1->bmbt.br_startoff) - > >> - be64_to_cpu(k2->bmbt.br_startoff); > >> + uint64_t a = be64_to_cpu(k1->bmbt.br_startoff); > >> + uint64_t b = be64_to_cpu(k2->bmbt.br_startoff); > >> + > >> + /* > >> + * Note: This routine previously casted a and b to int64 and subtracted > >> + * them to generate a result. This lead to problems if b was the > >> + * "maximum" key value (all ones) being signed incorrectly, hence this > >> + * somewhat less efficient version. > >> + */ > >> + if (a > b) > >> + return 1; > >> + else if (b > a) > >> + return -1; > > > > No need for an else here, but otherwise OK. > > > > Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com> > > In fact having the else means the a == b case isn't handled, even if it > should never happen, so might a static checker eventually complain about > reaching the end of a non-void function? Hmm? There's a return 0 after that which Dave's reply clipped. --D > -Eric >
On 8/27/19 10:19 AM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 08:01:16AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> On 8/26/19 6:15 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: >>> On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 02:49:09PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: >>>> From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com> >>>> >>>> In xfs_bmbt_diff_two_keys, we perform a signed int64_t subtraction with >>>> two unsigned 64-bit quantities. If the second quantity is actually the >>>> "maximum" key (all ones) as used in _query_all, the subtraction >>>> effectively becomes addition of two positive numbers and the function >>>> returns incorrect results. Fix this with explicit comparisons of the >>>> unsigned values. Nobody needs this now, but the online repair patches >>>> will need this to work properly. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com> >>>> --- >>>> fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c | 16 ++++++++++++++-- >>>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> >>>> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c >>>> index fbb18ba5d905..3c1a805b3775 100644 >>>> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c >>>> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c >>>> @@ -400,8 +400,20 @@ xfs_bmbt_diff_two_keys( >>>> union xfs_btree_key *k1, >>>> union xfs_btree_key *k2) >>>> { >>>> - return (int64_t)be64_to_cpu(k1->bmbt.br_startoff) - >>>> - be64_to_cpu(k2->bmbt.br_startoff); >>>> + uint64_t a = be64_to_cpu(k1->bmbt.br_startoff); >>>> + uint64_t b = be64_to_cpu(k2->bmbt.br_startoff); >>>> + >>>> + /* >>>> + * Note: This routine previously casted a and b to int64 and subtracted >>>> + * them to generate a result. This lead to problems if b was the >>>> + * "maximum" key value (all ones) being signed incorrectly, hence this >>>> + * somewhat less efficient version. >>>> + */ >>>> + if (a > b) >>>> + return 1; >>>> + else if (b > a) >>>> + return -1; >>> >>> No need for an else here, but otherwise OK. >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com> >> >> In fact having the else means the a == b case isn't handled, even if it >> should never happen, so might a static checker eventually complain about >> reaching the end of a non-void function? > > Hmm? There's a return 0 after that which Dave's reply clipped. Oh sorry, patch/thread reading skills lacking, too early in the AM. -Eric
diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c index fbb18ba5d905..3c1a805b3775 100644 --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap_btree.c @@ -400,8 +400,20 @@ xfs_bmbt_diff_two_keys( union xfs_btree_key *k1, union xfs_btree_key *k2) { - return (int64_t)be64_to_cpu(k1->bmbt.br_startoff) - - be64_to_cpu(k2->bmbt.br_startoff); + uint64_t a = be64_to_cpu(k1->bmbt.br_startoff); + uint64_t b = be64_to_cpu(k2->bmbt.br_startoff); + + /* + * Note: This routine previously casted a and b to int64 and subtracted + * them to generate a result. This lead to problems if b was the + * "maximum" key value (all ones) being signed incorrectly, hence this + * somewhat less efficient version. + */ + if (a > b) + return 1; + else if (b > a) + return -1; + return 0; } static xfs_failaddr_t