linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] libata: get rid of ATA_MAX_QUEUE loop in ata_qc_complete

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20081023134017.GA22217@kernel.dk>
Date:	Thu, 23 Oct 2008 15:40:18 +0200
From:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	jeff@...zik.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] libata: get rid of ATA_MAX_QUEUE loop in ata_qc_complete_multiple()

On Thu, Oct 23 2008, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 23 2008, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > while (done_mask) {
> >         struct ata_queued_cmd *qc;
> >         unsigned int next = __ffs(done_mask);
> > 
> >         tag += next;
> >         if ((qc = ata_qc_from_tag(ap, tag))) {
> >                 ata_qc_complete(qc);
> >                 nr_done++;
> >         }
> >         next++;
> >         tag += next;
> >         done_mask >>= next;
> > }
> 
> That doesn't work (you're adding next to tag twice), it needs a little
> tweak:
> 
> while (done_mask) {
>         struct ata_queued_cmd *qc;
>         unsigned int next = __ffs(done_mask);
> 
>         if ((qc = ata_qc_from_tag(ap, tag + next))) {
>                 ata_qc_complete(qc);
>                 nr_done++;
>         }
>         next++;
>         tag += next;
>         done_mask >>= next;
> }
> 
> and I think it should work. Not tested yet :-)

Pondered some more, and it can't work. The problem is that if we
complete tag 31, we attempt to shift done_mask down by 32 bits. On a
32-bit arch, that's not defined. So we DO need a check like the existing
one, or something similar.

So I don't think we need to make changes to this patch either, at least
unless one of you can come up with a better check that avoids a branch.

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/