Commit 86cbc007 authored by Jan Kara's avatar Jan Kara Committed by Ben Hutchings

xfs: Fix xfs_attr_leafblock definition

commit ffeecc52 upstream.

struct xfs_attr_leafblock contains 'entries' array which is declared
with size 1 altough it can in fact contain much more entries. Since this
array is followed by further struct members, gcc (at least in version
4.8.3) thinks that the array has the fixed size of 1 element and thus
may optimize away all accesses beyond the end of array resulting in
non-working code. This problem was only observed with userspace code in
xfsprogs, however it's better to be safe in kernel as well and have
matching kernel and xfsprogs definitions.
Signed-off-by: default avatarJan Kara <jack@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarDave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
[bwh: Backported to 3.2: adjust filename]
Signed-off-by: default avatarBen Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
parent 209a7a67
...@@ -111,8 +111,15 @@ typedef struct xfs_attr_leaf_name_remote { ...@@ -111,8 +111,15 @@ typedef struct xfs_attr_leaf_name_remote {
typedef struct xfs_attr_leafblock { typedef struct xfs_attr_leafblock {
xfs_attr_leaf_hdr_t hdr; /* constant-structure header block */ xfs_attr_leaf_hdr_t hdr; /* constant-structure header block */
xfs_attr_leaf_entry_t entries[1]; /* sorted on key, not name */ xfs_attr_leaf_entry_t entries[1]; /* sorted on key, not name */
xfs_attr_leaf_name_local_t namelist; /* grows from bottom of buf */ /*
xfs_attr_leaf_name_remote_t valuelist; /* grows from bottom of buf */ * The rest of the block contains the following structures after the
* leaf entries, growing from the bottom up. The variables are never
* referenced and definining them can actually make gcc optimize away
* accesses to the 'entries' array above index 0 so don't do that.
*
* xfs_attr_leaf_name_local_t namelist;
* xfs_attr_leaf_name_remote_t valuelist;
*/
} xfs_attr_leafblock_t; } xfs_attr_leafblock_t;
/* /*
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment