Dan Carpenter
2020-Jun-23 11:05 UTC
[Ocfs2-devel] [bug report] ocfs2: fix value of OCFS2_INVALID_SLOT
Hello Junxiao Bi,
The patch c824ce1feffa: "ocfs2: fix value of OCFS2_INVALID_SLOT" from
Jun 21, 2020, leads to the following static checker warning:
fs/ocfs2/super.c:1269 ocfs2_parse_options()
warn: '(-1)' 65535 can't fit into 32767 'mopt->slot'
fs/ocfs2/super.c
1253 static int ocfs2_parse_options(struct super_block *sb,
1254 char *options,
1255 struct mount_options *mopt,
1256 int is_remount)
1257 {
1258 int status, user_stack = 0;
1259 char *p;
1260 u32 tmp;
1261 int token, option;
1262 substring_t args[MAX_OPT_ARGS];
1263
1264 trace_ocfs2_parse_options(is_remount, options ? options :
"(none)");
1265
1266 mopt->commit_interval = 0;
1267 mopt->mount_opt = OCFS2_MOUNT_NOINTR;
1268 mopt->atime_quantum = OCFS2_DEFAULT_ATIME_QUANTUM;
1269 mopt->slot = OCFS2_INVALID_SLOT;
^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
OCFS2_INVALID_SLOT used to be -1, but the patch changed it to USHRT_MAX.
mopt->slot is a s16 so it becomes -1 again.
We assign it to osb->preferred_slot which is an int so it's still -1.
Then we do:
if (osb->preferred_slot != OCFS2_INVALID_SLOT)
Since -1 is not equal to USHRT_MAX then this condition is not true.
1270 mopt->localalloc_opt = -1;
1271 mopt->cluster_stack[0] = '\0';
1272 mopt->resv_level = OCFS2_DEFAULT_RESV_LEVEL;
1273 mopt->dir_resv_level = -1;
1274
1275 if (!options) {
1276 status = 1;
regards,
dan carpenter
Junxiao Bi
2020-Jun-23 20:26 UTC
[Ocfs2-devel] [bug report] ocfs2: fix value of OCFS2_INVALID_SLOT
On 6/23/20 4:05 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:> Hello Junxiao Bi, > > The patch c824ce1feffa: "ocfs2: fix value of OCFS2_INVALID_SLOT" from > Jun 21, 2020, leads to the following static checker warning: > > fs/ocfs2/super.c:1269 ocfs2_parse_options() > warn: '(-1)' 65535 can't fit into 32767 'mopt->slot' > > fs/ocfs2/super.c > 1253 static int ocfs2_parse_options(struct super_block *sb, > 1254 char *options, > 1255 struct mount_options *mopt, > 1256 int is_remount) > 1257 { > 1258 int status, user_stack = 0; > 1259 char *p; > 1260 u32 tmp; > 1261 int token, option; > 1262 substring_t args[MAX_OPT_ARGS]; > 1263 > 1264 trace_ocfs2_parse_options(is_remount, options ? options : "(none)"); > 1265 > 1266 mopt->commit_interval = 0; > 1267 mopt->mount_opt = OCFS2_MOUNT_NOINTR; > 1268 mopt->atime_quantum = OCFS2_DEFAULT_ATIME_QUANTUM; > 1269 mopt->slot = OCFS2_INVALID_SLOT; > ^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > OCFS2_INVALID_SLOT used to be -1, but the patch changed it to USHRT_MAX. > mopt->slot is a s16 so it becomes -1 again. > We assign it to osb->preferred_slot which is an int so it's still -1.hmm, i think osb->perferred_slot should be 65535, not -1. I test with the following small program. #include <stdlib.h> #include <stdio.h> int main(void) { ??? int i; ??? short s; ??? unsigned short us; ??? us = -1; ??? s = us; ??? i = s; ??? printf("i %d s %d us %d\n", i, s, us); } Thanks, Junxiao.> Then we do: > > if (osb->preferred_slot != OCFS2_INVALID_SLOT) > > Since -1 is not equal to USHRT_MAX then this condition is not true. > > 1270 mopt->localalloc_opt = -1; > 1271 mopt->cluster_stack[0] = '\0'; > 1272 mopt->resv_level = OCFS2_DEFAULT_RESV_LEVEL; > 1273 mopt->dir_resv_level = -1; > 1274 > 1275 if (!options) { > 1276 status = 1; > > regards, > dan carpenter