From: Jaegeuk Kim
> Sent: 11 March 2024 20:37
> On 03/10, David Laight wrote:
> > From: Roman Smirnov
> > > Sent: 05 March 2024 08:10
> > >
> > > Cast expression type to unsigned long in __count_extent_cache()
> > > to prevent integer overflow
From: Roman Smirnov
> Sent: 05 March 2024 08:10
>
> Cast expression type to unsigned long in __count_extent_cache()
> to prevent integer overflow.
>
> Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with Svace.
Another broken analysis tool :-)
> Signed-off-by: Roman Smirnov
>
From: Jan Kara
> Sent: 01 June 2023 17:14
>
> On Thu 01-06-23 15:37:32, David Laight wrote:
> > ...
> > > > > + * Lock any non-NULL argument. The caller must make sure that if he
> > > > > is passing
> > > > > + * in two direct
...
> > > + * Lock any non-NULL argument. The caller must make sure that if he is
> > > passing
> > > + * in two directories, one is not ancestor of the other
Not directly relevant to this change but is the 'not an ancestor'
check actually robust?
I found a condition in which the kernel 'pwd'
From: Jaegeuk Kim
> Sent: 09 March 2023 23:55
>
> On 03/08, David Laight wrote:
> > From: Chao Yu
> > > Sent: 07 March 2023 15:14
> > >
> > > F2FS-fs (dm-x): inconsistent rbtree, cur(3470333575168)
> > > next(3320009719808)
> > >
From: Chao Yu
> Sent: 07 March 2023 15:14
>
> F2FS-fs (dm-x): inconsistent rbtree, cur(3470333575168) next(3320009719808)
> [ cut here ]
> kernel BUG at fs/f2fs/gc.c:602!
> Internal error: Oops - BUG: 0 [#1] PREEMPT SMP ARM
> PC is at get_victim_by_default+0x13c0/0x1498
>
From: Segher Boessenkool
> Sent: 20 January 2023 10:54
...
> > > I suggest to file a bug against gcc complaining about a "spurious
> > > warning", and using "-Werror -Wno-error-sizeof-pointer-div" until gcc is
> > > adapted to not emit the warning about the pointer division if the result
> > > is
From: Joe Perches
> Sent: 12 October 2022 20:17
>
> On Wed, 2022-10-05 at 23:48 +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > The prandom_u32() function has been a deprecated inline wrapper around
> > get_random_u32() for several releases now, and compiles down to the
> > exact same code. Replace the
From: Dan Carpenter
> Sent: 07 March 2022 15:01
>
> Updating this API is risky because some places rely on the old behavior
> and not all of them have been updated. Here are some additional places
> you might want to change.
I really can't help thinking that trying to merge this patch is
From: Xiaomeng Tong
> Sent: 03 March 2022 07:27
>
> On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 04:58:23 +0000, David Laight wrote:
> > on 3 Mar 2022 10:27:29 +0800, Xiaomeng Tong wrote:
> > > The problem is the mis-use of iterator outside the loop on exit, and
> > > the iterator will b
From: Xiaomeng Tong
> Sent: 03 March 2022 02:27
>
> On Wed, 2 Mar 2022 14:04:06 +0000, David Laight
> wrote:
> > I think that it would be better to make any alternate loop macro
> > just set the variable to NULL on the loop exit.
> > That is easier to code for and t
From: Xiaomeng Tong
> Sent: 02 March 2022 09:31
>
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 16:41:04 -0800, Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
> >
> > But basically to _me_, the important part is that the end result is
> > maintainable longer-term.
>
> I couldn't agree more. And because of that, I stick with the following
>
From: Linus Torvalds
> Sent: 01 March 2022 23:03
>
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 2:58 PM David Laight wrote:
> >
> > Can it be resolved by making:
> > #define list_entry_is_head(pos, head, member) ((pos) == NULL)
> > and double-checking that it isn't used anywhere el
From: Linus Torvalds
> Sent: 01 March 2022 19:07
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 2:29 PM James Bottomley
> wrote:
> >
> > However, if the desire is really to poison the loop variable then we
> > can do
> >
> > #define list_for_each_entry(pos, head, member) \
> > for
From: Matthew Wilcox
> Sent: 28 February 2022 20:16
>
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:10:24PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > We can do
> >
> > typeof(pos) pos
> >
> > in the 'for ()' loop, and never use __iter at all.
> >
> > That means that inside the for-loop, we use a _different_ 'pos'
From: Linus Torvalds
> Sent: 28 February 2022 19:56
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 4:19 AM Christian König
> wrote:
> >
> > I don't think that using the extra variable makes the code in any way
> > more reliable or easier to read.
>
> So I think the next step is to do the attached patch (which
From: Jaegeuk Kim
> Sent: 04 June 2021 05:45
...
> > > @@ -161,6 +161,9 @@ static ssize_t features_show(struct f2fs_attr *a,
> > > if (f2fs_sb_has_compression(sbi))
> > > len += scnprintf(buf + len, PAGE_SIZE - len, "%s%s",
> > > len ? ", " : "",
From: Greg KH
> Sent: 03 June 2021 19:13
>
> On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 10:53:26AM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > On 06/03, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 08:40:24AM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > > On 06/03, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 09:50:38AM +, Daniel
From: Chao Yu
> Sent: 24 November 2020 03:12
>
> On 2020/11/24 1:05, David Laight wrote:
> > From: Sahitya Tummala
> >> Sent: 23 November 2020 05:29
> >>
> >> Use rwsem to ensure serialization of the callers and to avoid
> >> starvation of high
From: Sahitya Tummala
> Sent: 23 November 2020 05:29
>
> Use rwsem to ensure serialization of the callers and to avoid
> starvation of high priority tasks, when the system is under
> heavy IO workload.
I can't see any read lock requests.
So why the change?
David
-
Registered Address
From: Chao Yu
> Sent: 10 November 2020 06:28
...
> Actually, I think the both results are the same, inode chksum doesn't match
> inode
> metadata, like current case that cluster chksum doesn't match cluster data, it
> doesn't matter how it becomes mismatched.
>
> And also, in those inode
From: Chao Yu
> Sent: 03 November 2020 02:37
...
> >> Do we need to change fsck.f2fs to recover this?
>
> However, we don't know which one is correct, compressed data or chksum value?
> if compressed data was corrupted, repairing chksum value doesn't help.
>
> Or how about adding chksum values
22 matches
Mail list logo
