Re: [PATCH] zram: clean up valid_io_request

From	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH] zram: clean up valid_io_request
Date	2016-08-18 05:30 +0200
Message-ID	<s7mbL-2j1-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<s7m26-2f3-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

Hi,

On (08/18/16 11:08), Shawn Lin wrote:
[..]
> diff --git a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
> index 04365b1..1094e95 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
> @@ -120,15 +120,15 @@ static inline bool valid_io_request(struct zram *zram,
>  	u64 end, bound;
>  
>  	/* unaligned request */
> -	if (unlikely(start & (ZRAM_SECTOR_PER_LOGICAL_BLOCK - 1)))
> +	if (unlikely(!IS_ALIGNED(start, ZRAM_SECTOR_PER_LOGICAL_BLOCK)))
>  		return false;
> -	if (unlikely(size & (ZRAM_LOGICAL_BLOCK_SIZE - 1)))
> +	if (unlikely(!IS_ALIGNED(size, ZRAM_LOGICAL_BLOCK_SIZE)))
>  		return false;

ok.

>  	end = start + (size >> SECTOR_SHIFT);
>  	bound = zram->disksize >> SECTOR_SHIFT;
>  	/* out of range range */
> -	if (unlikely(start >= bound || end > bound || start > end))
> +	if (unlikely(start >= bound || end > bound))
>  		return false;

why did you drop `start > end'? what if `start + (size >> SECTOR_SHIFT)'
overflows and `start' becomes greater than `end'?

	-ss

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH] zram: clean up valid_io_request Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@rock-chips.com> - 2016-08-18 05:20 +0200
  Re: [PATCH] zram: clean up valid_io_request Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 05:30 +0200

csiph-web