[ofa-general] Re: [PATCH] fix idr_get_new_above id alias bugs
Tejun Heo
htejun at gmail.com
Thu Jul 12 20:46:53 PDT 2007
Hello,
Andrew Morton wrote:
>> Hoang-Nam Nguyen reported a bug in idr_get_new_above()
>> which occurred with a starting id value like 0x3ffffffc.
>> His test module easily reproduced the problem. Thanks.
>>
>> The test revealed the following bugs:
>>
>> 1. Relying on shift operations which have undefined results
>> e.g.: 1 << n where n > word size. On i386 an integer shift
>> only uses the low 5 bits of the shift count.
>>
>> 2. An off by one error which prevented the top most layer
>> of the radix tree from being allocated. This meant that
>> sub_alloc() would allocate an entry in the existing portion
>> of the radix tree which aliased the requested address. When
>> it tried to allocate id 0x40000000, it might use the slot
>> belonging to id 0.
>>
>> 3. There was also a failure in the code which walked back up
>> the tree if an allocation failed. The normal case is to
>> descend the tree checking the starting id value against the
>> bitmap at each level. If the bit is set, we know that the
>> entire sub-tree is full and we can short cut the search.
>> We may still descend to the lowest level and find that the
>> portion of the id space we want is full. In this case we
>> need to walk back up the tree and continue the search.
>> The existing code just returned to the previous level and
>> continued. This resulted in an attempt to allocate an id
>> above 0x3ffffffc using the slot for id 0x3ffffc00 instead of
>> 0x40000000 which it then claimed to have allocated. The same
>> problem occurs with 0x3ff as the requested id value if it
>> is already in use.
The third one sounds like the bug I fixed. With it fixed, I verified
idr works correctly at least in the lower range of allocation by running
it parallelly with simple bitmap allocator but haven't tested higher
range like 0x3ffffffc.
--
tejun
More information about the general
mailing list