On 05.02.2024 16:14, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> @@ -263,7 +266,7 @@ int bitmap_find_free_region(unsigned long *bitmap,
> unsigned int bits, unsigned i
> unsigned int pages = 1 << order;
If we mean to keep this function (see my reply to the other patch),
shouldn't we also check "order" along with
> unsigned int i;
>
> - if(pages > BITS_PER_LONG)
> + if (pages > BITS_PER_LONG || bits >= INT_MAX)
> return -EINVAL;
... these checks?
> @@ -278,7 +281,7 @@ int bitmap_find_free_region(unsigned long *bitmap,
> unsigned int bits, unsigned i
> if((bitmap[index] & (mask << offset)) == 0) {
> /* set region in bimap */
> bitmap[index] |= (mask << offset);
> - return i;
> + return (int)i;
I agree with Julien that it looks like this change actually belongs in
the other patch.
Jan
