Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Mon, 29 May 2023 15:44:23 +0200 | From | David Sterba <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] btrfs: Fix csum_tree_block to avoid tripping on -Werror=array-bounds |
| |
On Mon, May 29, 2023 at 11:28:59AM +0800, pengfuyuan wrote: > > On 2023/5/26 22:35, David Sterba wrote: > > On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 09:32:12PM +0200, David Sterba wrote: > >> On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 03:33:22PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > >>> On 2023/5/23 15:09, pengfuyuan wrote: > >>> Although even with such change, I'm still not sure if it's any better or > >>> worse, as most of the calculation can still be bulky. > > The final version is > > > > for (i = 1; i < num_pages && INLINE_EXTENT_BUFFER_PAGES > 1; i++) > > > > ie. 'INLINE_EXTENT_BUFFER_PAGES > 1' can be evaluated at compile time > > and result in removing the for loop completely. > > > > Pengfuyuan, can you please do a build test that it does not report the > > warning anymore? The diff is: > > > > --- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c > > +++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c > > @@ -88,7 +88,6 @@ static void csum_tree_block(struct extent_buffer *buf, u8 *result) > > const int first_page_part = min_t(u32, PAGE_SIZE, fs_info->nodesize); > > SHASH_DESC_ON_STACK(shash, fs_info->csum_shash); > > char *kaddr; > > - int i; > > > > shash->tfm = fs_info->csum_shash; > > crypto_shash_init(shash); > > @@ -96,7 +95,7 @@ static void csum_tree_block(struct extent_buffer *buf, u8 *result) > > crypto_shash_update(shash, kaddr + BTRFS_CSUM_SIZE, > > first_page_part - BTRFS_CSUM_SIZE); > > > > - for (i = 1; i < num_pages; i++) { > > + for (int i = 1; i < num_pages && INLINE_EXTENT_BUFFER_PAGES > 1; i++) { > > kaddr = page_address(buf->pages[i]); > > crypto_shash_update(shash, kaddr, PAGE_SIZE); > > } > > --- > > I did a build test on the mips64 architecture, the compilation passed, > and it no longer reported warnings.
Thanks, patch added to misc-next.
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |