linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 22/26] block: Add bio_alloc

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: <20120921004711.GZ7264@google.com>
Date:	Thu, 20 Sep 2012 17:47:11 -0700
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Kent Overstreet <koverstreet@...gle.com>
Cc:	linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	dm-devel@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk, neilb@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 22/26] block: Add bio_alloc_pages()

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 05:22:33PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> +	bio_for_each_segment_all(bv, bio, i) {
> +		bv->bv_page = alloc_page(gfp_mask);
> +		if (!bv->bv_page) {
> +			while (bv-- != bio->bi_io_vec)
> +				__free_page(bv->bv_page);

I don't know.  I feel stupid.  I think it's because the loop variable
changes between loop condition test and actual body of loop.  How
about the following?  It is pointing to the member of the same array
so I think it's not even violating pointer comparison rules.

	while (--bv >= bio->bi_io_vec)
		__free_page(bv->bv_page);

-- 
tejun
--
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/