qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/1] nbd: fix max_discard/max_transfer_length


From: Peter Lieven
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/1] nbd: fix max_discard/max_transfer_length
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2015 13:16:51 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0

Am 06.02.2015 um 12:53 schrieb Kevin Wolf:
> Am 06.02.2015 um 12:24 hat Denis V. Lunev geschrieben:
>> nbd_co_discard calls nbd_client_session_co_discard which uses uint32_t
>> as the length in bytes of the data to discard due to the following
>> definition:
>>
>> struct nbd_request {
>>     uint32_t magic;
>>     uint32_t type;
>>     uint64_t handle;
>>     uint64_t from;
>>     uint32_t len; <-- the length of data to be discarded, in bytes
>> } QEMU_PACKED;
>>
>> Thus we should limit bl_max_discard to UINT32_MAX >> BDRV_SECTOR_BITS to
>> avoid overflow.
>>
>> NBD read/write code uses the same structure for transfers. Fix
>> max_transfer_length accordingly.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Denis V. Lunev <address@hidden>
>> CC: Peter Lieven <address@hidden>
>> CC: Kevin Wolf <address@hidden>
> Thanks, I have applied both Peter's and your patch. Can you guys please
> check whether the current state of my block branch is correct or whether
> I forgot to include or remove some patch?

Looks good from my point of view.

Just to be sure has it to be

if (size > BDRV_REQUEST_MAX_SECTORS << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS)

or

if (size > (BDRV_REQUEST_MAX_SECTORS << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS))

?

If the latter is right, can you please fix that line in my patch. I am afk now.

Thanks,
Peter



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]