From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Sergey Klyaus <sergey.m.klyaus@gmail.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Li Wang <liwang@redhat.com>, Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca>,
Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfs: fix statfs64() returning impossible EOVERFLOW for 64-bit f_files
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 18:31:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFzJYXCNPXT8D91FmjU2AWOfvWMnx2BZE+0CLgBcqX3u1g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171005230633.GK21978@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> Just to make sure we are on the same page: out of kstatfs fields
> we have 5 u64 ones (see above; all of them are u64 is struct statfs64
> on all architectures), an opaque 64bit f_fsid and 5 fields that
> are long: f_type (magic numbers, all 32bit), f_namelen (max filename
> length), f_frsize (0 on most of filesystems, always fits into 32 bits),
> f_flags (guaranteed to be 32bit) and f_bsize.
Please just use that FITS_IN() kind of macro regardless.
If the sizes match, the compiler will optimize the test away.
If the sizes don't match, that FITS_IN() will do the right thing.
Do *not* manually go and say "these fields are ok, because..". The
whole bug was because people were confused about the field widths.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-06 1:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-05 18:36 [PATCH] vfs: fix statfs64() returning impossible EOVERFLOW for 64-bit f_files Sergey Klyaus
2017-10-05 20:57 ` Al Viro
2017-10-05 22:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-10-05 23:06 ` Al Viro
2017-10-06 1:31 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2017-10-18 16:04 ` [PATCH v2] vfs: Improve overflow checking for stat*() compat fields Sergey Klyaus
2018-08-06 17:06 ` [PATCH] vfs: fix statfs64() returning impossible EOVERFLOW for 64-bit f_files Al Viro
2018-08-06 18:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-08-06 21:03 ` Al Viro
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=CA+55aFzJYXCNPXT8D91FmjU2AWOfvWMnx2BZE+0CLgBcqX3u1g@mail.gmail.com \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=adilger@dilger.ca \
--cc=andi.kleen@intel.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liwang@redhat.com \
--cc=sergey.m.klyaus@gmail.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.