* [PATCH] xfs: clean code for setting bma length in xfs_bmapi_write
@ 2020-12-12 12:48 chenlei0x
2020-12-12 16:12 ` Gao Xiang
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: chenlei0x @ 2020-12-12 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: chenlei0x, darrick.wong, linux-xfs, linux-kernel; +Cc: Lei Chen
From: Lei Chen <lennychen@tencent.com>
xfs_bmapi_write may need alloc blocks when it encounters a hole
or delay extent. When setting bma.length, it does not need comparing
MAXEXTLEN and the length that the caller wants, because
xfs_bmapi_allocate will handle every thing properly for bma.length.
Signed-off-by: Lei Chen <lennychen@tencent.com>
---
fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c | 13 +------------
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
index dcf56bc..e1b6ac6 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
@@ -4417,18 +4417,7 @@ struct xfs_iread_state {
bma.wasdel = wasdelay;
bma.offset = bno;
bma.flags = flags;
-
- /*
- * There's a 32/64 bit type mismatch between the
- * allocation length request (which can be 64 bits in
- * length) and the bma length request, which is
- * xfs_extlen_t and therefore 32 bits. Hence we have to
- * check for 32-bit overflows and handle them here.
- */
- if (len > (xfs_filblks_t)MAXEXTLEN)
- bma.length = MAXEXTLEN;
- else
- bma.length = len;
+ bma.length = len;
ASSERT(len > 0);
ASSERT(bma.length > 0);
--
1.8.3.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] xfs: clean code for setting bma length in xfs_bmapi_write
2020-12-12 12:48 [PATCH] xfs: clean code for setting bma length in xfs_bmapi_write chenlei0x
@ 2020-12-12 16:12 ` Gao Xiang
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Gao Xiang @ 2020-12-12 16:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: chenlei0x; +Cc: darrick.wong, linux-xfs, linux-kernel, Lei Chen
On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 08:48:17PM +0800, chenlei0x@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Lei Chen <lennychen@tencent.com>
>
> xfs_bmapi_write may need alloc blocks when it encounters a hole
> or delay extent. When setting bma.length, it does not need comparing
> MAXEXTLEN and the length that the caller wants, because
> xfs_bmapi_allocate will handle every thing properly for bma.length.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lei Chen <lennychen@tencent.com>
> ---
> fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c | 13 +------------
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> index dcf56bc..e1b6ac6 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> @@ -4417,18 +4417,7 @@ struct xfs_iread_state {
> bma.wasdel = wasdelay;
> bma.offset = bno;
> bma.flags = flags;
> -
> - /*
> - * There's a 32/64 bit type mismatch between the
> - * allocation length request (which can be 64 bits in
> - * length) and the bma length request, which is
> - * xfs_extlen_t and therefore 32 bits. Hence we have to
> - * check for 32-bit overflows and handle them here.
> - */
> - if (len > (xfs_filblks_t)MAXEXTLEN)
> - bma.length = MAXEXTLEN;
> - else
> - bma.length = len;
> + bma.length = len;
After refering to the definition of struct xfs_bmalloca, so I think
bma.length is still a xfs_extlen_t ===> uint32_t, so I'm afraid the commit
a99ebf43f49f ("xfs: fix allocation length overflow in xfs_bmapi_write()")
and the reason for adding this is still valid for now?
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-12-12 16:14 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-12-12 12:48 [PATCH] xfs: clean code for setting bma length in xfs_bmapi_write chenlei0x
2020-12-12 16:12 ` Gao Xiang
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.