[PATCH 0/2] block: avoid integer overflow of `max-workers` and assert `max_busy_tasks`

Stefano Garzarella posted 2 patches 2 years, 6 months ago
Test checkpatch passed
Patches applied successfully (tree, apply log)
git fetch https://github.com/patchew-project/qemu tags/patchew/20211005161157.282396-1-sgarzare@redhat.com
Maintainers: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>, Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>, Hanna Reitz <hreitz@redhat.com>
block/aio_task.c | 2 ++
block/backup.c   | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
[PATCH 0/2] block: avoid integer overflow of `max-workers` and assert `max_busy_tasks`
Posted by Stefano Garzarella 2 years, 6 months ago
This series contains a patch that avoids an integer overflow of
`max-workers` (struct BackupPerf) by adding a check and a patch
that asserts this condition where the problem occurs.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2009310
Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>

Stefano Garzarella (2):
  block/backup: avoid integer overflow of `max-workers`
  block/aio_task: assert `max_busy_tasks` is greater than 0

 block/aio_task.c | 2 ++
 block/backup.c   | 4 ++--
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

-- 
2.31.1


Re: [PATCH 0/2] block: avoid integer overflow of `max-workers` and assert `max_busy_tasks`
Posted by Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy 2 years, 6 months ago
10/5/21 19:11, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> This series contains a patch that avoids an integer overflow of
> `max-workers` (struct BackupPerf) by adding a check and a patch
> that asserts this condition where the problem occurs.
> 
> Buglink: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2009310
> Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
> 
> Stefano Garzarella (2):
>    block/backup: avoid integer overflow of `max-workers`
>    block/aio_task: assert `max_busy_tasks` is greater than 0
> 
>   block/aio_task.c | 2 ++
>   block/backup.c   | 4 ++--
>   2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 

Thanks for fixing, I'm applying it to my jobs branch.

-- 
Best regards,
Vladimir