lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Mar]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: RFC: radix tree safety
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>
> >I've been digging through the radix tree code, and I noticed that the
> >tag functions have an interesting limitation. The tag is given as an
> >integer value, but, in reality, the only values that work are zero and
> >one. Anything else will return random results or (when setting tags)
> >corrupt unrelated memory.

Various people at various times have added additional tags. reiser4...

> >The number of radix tree users is small, so it's not hard to confirm
> >that all tag values currently in use are legal. But the interface would
> >seem to invite mistakes.
> >
> >The following patch puts in checks for out-of-range tag values. I've
> >elected to have the relevant call fail; one could argue that it should
> >BUG instead. Either seems better than silently doing weird stuff. Not
> >2.6.16 material, obviously, but maybe suitable thereafter.
> >
> >
>
> I'd agree if you make them BUG_ON()s.
>
> Andrew Morton's kind of the radix-tree tags guy though... Andrew?

I don't really see the need - if someone goes and overindexes the data
structure's capacity then they have a bug and hopefully that'll turn up in
testing and will get fixed.

Or am I missing something obvious which makes radix-trees particularly
dangerous or subtle??
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-03-14 00:56    [W:0.061 / U:0.328 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site