[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7b2240e8-6776-9b3e-b054-eeb16d87142b@nvidia.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2023 17:59:50 +0000
From: Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@...dia.com>
To: Zhong Jinghua <zhongjinghua@...weicloud.com>,
"axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>
CC: "linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"willy@...radead.org" <willy@...radead.org>,
"zhongjinghua@...wei.com" <zhongjinghua@...wei.com>,
"yi.zhang@...wei.com" <yi.zhang@...wei.com>,
"yukuai3@...wei.com" <yukuai3@...wei.com>,
"houtao1@...wei.com" <houtao1@...wei.com>,
"code@...dh.me" <code@...dh.me>
Subject: Re: [PATCH-next v4] loop: loop_set_status_from_info() check before
assignment
On 2/21/2023 1:50 AM, Zhong Jinghua wrote:
> From: Zhong Jinghua <zhongjinghua@...wei.com>
>
> In loop_set_status_from_info(), lo->lo_offset and lo->lo_sizelimit should
> be checked before reassignment, because if an overflow error occurs, the
> original correct value will be changed to the wrong value, and it will not
> be changed back.
>
> More, the original patch did not solve the problem, the value was set and
> ioctl returned an error, but the subsequent io used the value in the loop
> driver, which still caused an alarm:
>
> loop_handle_cmd
> do_req_filebacked
> loff_t pos = ((loff_t) blk_rq_pos(rq) << 9) + lo->lo_offset;
> lo_rw_aio
> cmd->iocb.ki_pos = pos
>
> Fixes: c490a0b5a4f3 ("loop: Check for overflow while configuring loop")
> Signed-off-by: Zhong Jinghua <zhongjinghua@...wei.com>
Reviewed-by: Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@...dia.com>
-ck
Powered by blists - more mailing lists