On Wed, 13 May 2020 13:56:40 -0700 Jacob Keller wrote:
> > @@ -4294,8 +4289,21 @@ static int devlink_nl_cmd_region_read_dumpit(struct
> > sk_buff *skb,
> > goto out_unlock;
> > }
> >
> > + if (attrs[DEVLINK_ATTR_REGION_CHUNK_ADDR] &&
> > + attrs[DEVLINK_ATTR_REGION_CHUNK_LEN]) {
> > + if (!start_offset)
> > + start_offset =
> > +
> > nla_get_u64(attrs[DEVLINK_ATTR_REGION_CHUNK_ADDR]);
> > +
> > + end_offset =
> > nla_get_u64(attrs[DEVLINK_ATTR_REGION_CHUNK_ADDR]);
>
> At first, reading this confused me a bit, but it makes sense. The end
> is always "beginning + length".
>
> If the start_offset is set before, this simply means that we needed to
> read over multiple buffers. Ok.
Yup, I just moved this from below, didn't seem bad enough to rewrite.
> > + end_offset += nla_get_u64(attrs[DEVLINK_ATTR_REGION_CHUNK_LEN]);
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (end_offset > region->size)
> > + end_offset = region->size;
> > +
> > /* return 0 if there is no further data to read */
> > - if (start_offset >= region->size) {
> > + if (start_offset == end_offset) {
>
> Why change this to ==? isn't it possible to specify a start_offset that
> is out of bounds? I think this should still be >=
See 5 lines above :) I moved the capping of end_offset from
devlink_nl_region_read_snapshot_fill() to here. We can keep
it greater equal, but that reads a little defensive.
> > err = 0;
> > goto out_unlock;
> > }
