Re: Possible integer overflow in bringetbitmap()

From: James Hunter <james(dot)hunter(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Evgeniy Gorbanyov <gorbanyoves(at)basealt(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Possible integer overflow in bringetbitmap()
Date: 2025-01-10 19:22:37
Message-ID: CAJVSvF4b8R7qG0otbQBD4Ps-wSKVpj9BsRrMhSGzUXE1JthFpQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 3:22 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 12:33:08PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > Sure, you could do (a) and (b) together. It also seems to me that it
> > is just simpler to make totalpages a int64 to map automatically with
> > the result expected by the caller of bringetbitmap(), and we know that
> > based on MaxBlockNumber we'll never run out of bits.
>
> That should be simple enough. Are you planning to send a proposal of
> patch?

Attached the proposed one-line fix.
James

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-Fix-integer-overflow-in-bringetbitmap.patch application/octet-stream 1.2 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2025-01-10 19:26:06 Re: Proposal: add new API to stringinfo
Previous Message Nathan Bossart 2025-01-10 19:19:55 Re: use a non-locking initial test in TAS_SPIN on AArch64