linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: fix arithmetic for max_prop_frac when setting max

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]

Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2023 13:58:21 +0800
From: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: shr@...kernel.io, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, joseph.qi@...ux.alibaba.com,
 linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: fix arithmetic for max_prop_frac when setting
 max_ratio



On 12/19/23 12:06 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 10:42:46AM +0800, Jingbo Xu wrote:
>>  	} else {
>>  		bdi->max_ratio = max_ratio;
>> -		bdi->max_prop_frac = (FPROP_FRAC_BASE * max_ratio) / 100;
>> +		bdi->max_prop_frac = div64_u64(FPROP_FRAC_BASE * max_ratio,
>> +					       100 * BDI_RATIO_SCALE);
>>  	}
> 
> Why use div64_u64 here?
> 
> FPROP_FRAC_BASE is an unsigned long.  max_ratio is an unsigned int, so
> the numerator is an unsigned long.  BDI_RATIO_SCALE is 10,000, so the
> numerator is an unsigned int.  There's no 64-bit arithmetic needed here.

Yes, div64_u64() is actually not needed here. So it seems

bdi->max_prop_frac = FPROP_FRAC_BASE * max_ratio / 100 / BDI_RATIO_SCALE;

is adequate?

-- 
Thanks,
Jingbo