On Tue, 23 Dec 2025 17:29:38 +0800 Li Wang liwang@redhat.com wrote:
David Laight david.laight.linux@gmail.com wrote:
What was wrong with atoi() ?
As the patch summary described, write_to_hugetlbfs previously parsed -s via atoi() into an int, which can overflow and print negative sizes. This problem was found on our kernel-64k platform and
#./charge_reserved_hugetlb.sh -cgroup-v2 # ----------------------------------------- ... # nr hugepages = 10 # writing cgroup limit: 5368709120 # writing reseravation limit: 5368709120 ... # Writing to this path: /mnt/huge/test # Writing this size: -1610612736 <--------
So the problem was that atoi() doesn't let you specify valid values over 2GB. That isn't how I read the patch summary. It read as though you were worried about detecting invalid input.
David