From: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>
orangefs_statfs() copies two consecutive fields of the superblock into
the statfs structure, which triggers a warning from the string fortification
helpers:
In file included from fs/orangefs/super.c:8:
include/linux/fortify-string.h:592:4: error: call to '__read_overflow2_field' declared with 'warning' attribute: detected read beyond size of field (2nd parameter); maybe use struct_group()? [-Werror,-Wattribute-warning]
__read_overflow2_field(q_size_field, size);
Change the memcpy() to an individual assignment of the two fields, which helps
both the compiler and human readers understand better what it does.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
Cc: Alexander Viro <[email protected]>
Cc: Christian Brauner <[email protected]>
Cc: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: Mike Marshall <[email protected]>
Cc: Martin Brandenburg <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>
---
Resending to VFS maintainers, I sent this a couple of times to the
orangefs maintainers but never got a reply
---
fs/orangefs/super.c | 5 ++++-
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/orangefs/super.c b/fs/orangefs/super.c
index fb4d09c2f531..152478295766 100644
--- a/fs/orangefs/super.c
+++ b/fs/orangefs/super.c
@@ -201,7 +201,10 @@ static int orangefs_statfs(struct dentry *dentry, struct kstatfs *buf)
(long)new_op->downcall.resp.statfs.files_avail);
buf->f_type = sb->s_magic;
- memcpy(&buf->f_fsid, &ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->fs_id, sizeof(buf->f_fsid));
+ buf->f_fsid = (__kernel_fsid_t) {{
+ ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->fs_id,
+ ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->id,
+ }};
buf->f_bsize = new_op->downcall.resp.statfs.block_size;
buf->f_namelen = ORANGEFS_NAME_MAX;
--
2.39.2
On Mon 08-04-24 09:50:43, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>
>
> orangefs_statfs() copies two consecutive fields of the superblock into
> the statfs structure, which triggers a warning from the string fortification
> helpers:
>
> In file included from fs/orangefs/super.c:8:
> include/linux/fortify-string.h:592:4: error: call to '__read_overflow2_field' declared with 'warning' attribute: detected read beyond size of field (2nd parameter); maybe use struct_group()? [-Werror,-Wattribute-warning]
> __read_overflow2_field(q_size_field, size);
>
> Change the memcpy() to an individual assignment of the two fields, which helps
> both the compiler and human readers understand better what it does.
>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
> Cc: Alexander Viro <[email protected]>
> Cc: Christian Brauner <[email protected]>
> Cc: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: Mike Marshall <[email protected]>
> Cc: Martin Brandenburg <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>
> ---
> Resending to VFS maintainers, I sent this a couple of times to the
> orangefs maintainers but never got a reply
> ---
> fs/orangefs/super.c | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/orangefs/super.c b/fs/orangefs/super.c
> index fb4d09c2f531..152478295766 100644
> --- a/fs/orangefs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/orangefs/super.c
> @@ -201,7 +201,10 @@ static int orangefs_statfs(struct dentry *dentry, struct kstatfs *buf)
> (long)new_op->downcall.resp.statfs.files_avail);
>
> buf->f_type = sb->s_magic;
> - memcpy(&buf->f_fsid, &ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->fs_id, sizeof(buf->f_fsid));
> + buf->f_fsid = (__kernel_fsid_t) {{
> + ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->fs_id,
> + ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->id,
> + }};
Frankly, this initializer is hard to understand for me. Why not simple:
buf->f_fsid[0] = ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->fs_id;
buf->f_fsid[1] = ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->id;
Honza
--
Jan Kara <[email protected]>
SUSE Labs, CR
On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 7:36 AM Jan Kara <[email protected]> wrote:
> Frankly, this initializer is hard to understand for me. Why not simple:
>
> buf->f_fsid[0] = ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->fs_id;
> buf->f_fsid[1] = ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->id;
>
+1 for this idea, seems easier to read for me.
> Honza
> --
> Jan Kara <[email protected]>
> SUSE Labs, CR
On Mon, Apr 8, 2024, at 23:21, Justin Stitt wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 7:36 AM Jan Kara <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Frankly, this initializer is hard to understand for me. Why not simple:
>>
>> buf->f_fsid[0] = ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->fs_id;
>> buf->f_fsid[1] = ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->id;
>>
>
> +1 for this idea, seems easier to read for me.
Yes, good idea, I'll send this as v2 after my next round
of build testing.
Arnd
I applied Arnd's patch on top of Linux 6.9-rc3 and
ran through xfstests with no issue.
Also, instead of Arnd's patch, I used Jan's idea:
+
+ buf->f_fsid.val[0] = ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->fs_id;
+ buf->f_fsid.val[1] = ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->id;
+
And ran that through as well, no issue.
Sorry for missing the earlier patch.
-Mike
On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 1:55 AM Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 8, 2024, at 23:21, Justin Stitt wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 7:36 AM Jan Kara <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Frankly, this initializer is hard to understand for me. Why not simple:
> >>
> >> buf->f_fsid[0] = ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->fs_id;
> >> buf->f_fsid[1] = ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->id;
> >>
> >
> > +1 for this idea, seems easier to read for me.
>
> Yes, good idea, I'll send this as v2 after my next round
> of build testing.
>
> Arnd
On Tue, Apr 9, 2024, at 18:26, Mike Marshall wrote:
> I applied Arnd's patch on top of Linux 6.9-rc3 and
> ran through xfstests with no issue.
>
> Also, instead of Arnd's patch, I used Jan's idea:
>
> +
> + buf->f_fsid.val[0] = ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->fs_id;
> + buf->f_fsid.val[1] = ORANGEFS_SB(sb)->id;
> +
>
> And ran that through as well, no issue.
>
> Sorry for missing the earlier patch.
Thanks!
I was about to send the updated patch and can skip that now.
Arnd