lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [May]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    Patch in this message
    /
    From
    Subject[PATCH 3.16.y-ckt 076/129] writeback: use |1 instead of +1 to protect against div by zero
    Date
    3.16.7-ckt12 -stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

    ------------------

    From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>

    commit 464d1387acb94dc43ba772b35242345e3d2ead1b upstream.

    mm/page-writeback.c has several places where 1 is added to the divisor
    to prevent division by zero exceptions; however, if the original
    divisor is equivalent to -1, adding 1 leads to division by zero.

    There are three places where +1 is used for this purpose - one in
    pos_ratio_polynom() and two in bdi_position_ratio(). The second one
    in bdi_position_ratio() actually triggered div-by-zero oops on a
    machine running a 3.10 kernel. The divisor is

    x_intercept - bdi_setpoint + 1 == span + 1

    span is confirmed to be (u32)-1. It isn't clear how it ended up that
    but it could be from write bandwidth calculation underflow fixed by
    c72efb658f7c ("writeback: fix possible underflow in write bandwidth
    calculation").

    At any rate, +1 isn't a proper protection against div-by-zero. This
    patch converts all +1 protections to |1. Note that
    bdi_update_dirty_ratelimit() was already using |1 before this patch.

    Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
    Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
    Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
    Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <luis.henriques@canonical.com>
    ---
    mm/page-writeback.c | 6 +++---
    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

    diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c
    index 6a3348761648..a6fd1a3615f9 100644
    --- a/mm/page-writeback.c
    +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c
    @@ -583,7 +583,7 @@ static long long pos_ratio_polynom(unsigned long setpoint,
    long x;

    x = div64_s64(((s64)setpoint - (s64)dirty) << RATELIMIT_CALC_SHIFT,
    - limit - setpoint + 1);
    + (limit - setpoint) | 1);
    pos_ratio = x;
    pos_ratio = pos_ratio * x >> RATELIMIT_CALC_SHIFT;
    pos_ratio = pos_ratio * x >> RATELIMIT_CALC_SHIFT;
    @@ -810,7 +810,7 @@ static unsigned long bdi_position_ratio(struct backing_dev_info *bdi,
    * scale global setpoint to bdi's:
    * bdi_setpoint = setpoint * bdi_thresh / thresh
    */
    - x = div_u64((u64)bdi_thresh << 16, thresh + 1);
    + x = div_u64((u64)bdi_thresh << 16, thresh | 1);
    bdi_setpoint = setpoint * (u64)x >> 16;
    /*
    * Use span=(8*write_bw) in single bdi case as indicated by
    @@ -825,7 +825,7 @@ static unsigned long bdi_position_ratio(struct backing_dev_info *bdi,

    if (bdi_dirty < x_intercept - span / 4) {
    pos_ratio = div64_u64(pos_ratio * (x_intercept - bdi_dirty),
    - x_intercept - bdi_setpoint + 1);
    + (x_intercept - bdi_setpoint) | 1);
    } else
    pos_ratio /= 4;


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2015-05-22 11:41    [W:4.020 / U:1.328 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site