On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 22:55:43 -0800
Mingming Cao <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hmm, maxblocks, in bitmap_search_next_usable_block(), is the end block
> number of the range to search, not the lengh of the range. maxblocks
> get passed to ext2_find_next_zero_bit(), where it expecting to take the
> _size_ of the range to search instead...
>
> Something like this: (this is not a patch)
> @@ -524,7 +524,7 @@ bitmap_search_next_usable_block(ext2_grp
> ext2_grpblk_t next;
>
> - next = ext2_find_next_zero_bit(bh->b_data, maxblocks, start);
> + next = ext2_find_next_zero_bit(bh->b_data, maxblocks-start + 1, start);
> if (next >= maxblocks)
> return -1;
> return next;
> }
yes, the `size' arg to find_next_zero_bit() represents the number of bits
to scan at `offset'.
So I think your change is correctish. But we don't want the "+ 1", do we?
If we're right then this bug could cause the code to scan off the end of the
bitmap. But it won't explain Hugh's bug, because of the if (next >= maxblocks).
btw, how come try_to_extend_reservation() uses spin_trylock?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
