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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2022 11:25:03 +0800 From: Dawei Li <set_pte_at@...look.com> To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org> Cc: axboe@...nel.dk, hch@....de, linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] block: simplify blksize_bits() implementation On Sat, Oct 29, 2022 at 08:00:58PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 10/29/22 19:17, Dawei Li wrote: > > diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h > > index 57ed49f20d2e..7b537afe8b38 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/blkdev.h > > +++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h > > @@ -1349,12 +1349,7 @@ static inline int blk_rq_aligned(struct request_queue *q, unsigned long addr, > > /* assumes size > 256 */ > > static inline unsigned int blksize_bits(unsigned int size) > > { > > - unsigned int bits = 8; > > - do { > > - bits++; > > - size >>= 1; > > - } while (size > 256); > > - return bits; > > + return order_base_2((size + SECTOR_SIZE - 1) >> SECTOR_SHIFT) + SECTOR_SHIFT; > > } > > Why the rounding ("+ SECTOR_SIZE - 1")? The blksize_bits() argument should > be an argument of two. Yeah, that's what's supposed to be. But I thought maybe a "just in case" is more robust? Should we consider these corner cases(!is_power_of_2())? Thanks. > > Thanks, > > Bart. >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists