On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 02:28:25PM -0500, roel kluin wrote:Sorry, you are reading it wrong, the i values inside the loop are identical to those in the original. The value of i starts at count, and the test comes *before* the value is used inside the loop. The values of i inside the loop start at count-1 and go to zero, just as it did in the original. That's why the "i--" is there, the test is on the unincremented value range count to one, but the value inside the loop is correct (or at least is the same as the original patch).
Fix loop, with obvious unsigned wrap
Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@xxxxxxxxx>
Um, no. Sorry, I didn't have a chance to reply earlier but this is
obviously wrong.
As I said, the values used are identical, and the code works correctly.---
diff --git a/fs/ext3/namei.c b/fs/ext3/namei.c
index 3e5edc9..b0dcfb3 100644
--- a/fs/ext3/namei.c
+++ b/fs/ext3/namei.c
@@ -1188,7 +1188,7 @@ static struct ext3_dir_entry_2 *do_split(handle_t *handle, struct inode *dir,
/* Split the existing block in the middle, size-wise */
size = 0;
move = 0;
- for (i = count-1; i >= 0; i--) {
+ for (i = count; i--; ) {
/* is more than half of this entry in 2nd half of the block? */
if (size + map[i].size/2 > blocksize/2)
break;
Note that i is actually **used** in the loop? So changing the
starting value of the counter without also adjusting all of the places
where i is used will cause the code to break, and in hard to find
ways...
Given that there are two loop termination conditions, and in fact the
one in the loop is the one that actually gets used 99% of the time
(which is why we've never noticed the problem in real life), probably
the best way of handling this is to recast it not as a for loop, but
as a while loop.
- Ted