[PATCH 2/8] bitmap: Introduce bitmap_set, bitmap_clear, bitmap_find_next_zero_area

[FUJITA Tomonori]

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 23:43:56 +0900
Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2009/10/17 FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori at lab.ntt.co.jp>:
> > On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 18:10:17 +0900
> > Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> My user space testing exposed off-by-one error find_next_zero_area
> >> in iommu-helper. Some zero area cannot be found by this bug.
> >>
> >> Subject: [PATCH] Fix off-by-one error in find_next_zero_area
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita at gmail.com>
> >> ---
> >>  lib/iommu-helper.c |    2 +-
> >>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/lib/iommu-helper.c b/lib/iommu-helper.c
> >> index 75dbda0..afc58bc 100644
> >> --- a/lib/iommu-helper.c
> >> +++ b/lib/iommu-helper.c
> >> @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ again:
> >>       index = (index + align_mask) & ~align_mask;
> >>
> >>       end = index + nr;
> >> -     if (end >= size)
> >> +     if (end > size)
> >
> > I think that this is intentional; the last byte of the limit doesn't
> > work.
> 
> It looks ok to me. Without above change, find_next_zero_area cannot
> find a 64 bits zeroed area in next sample code.

I meant that we don't want to find such area for IOMMUs (IIRC, it code
came from POWER IOMMU).


>         unsigned long offset;
> 
>         DECLARE_BITMAP(map, 64);
> 
>         bitmap_clear(map, 0, 64);
>         offset = find_next_zero_area(map, 64, 0, 64, 0);
>         if (offset >= 64)
>                 printf("not found\n");
>         else
>                 printf("found\n");
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html