Re: [PATCH v9 13/17] vdpa: factor out vhost_vdpa_pa_map() and vhost_vdpa_pa_unmap()

From: Jason Wang
Date: Tue Jul 13 2021 - 22:14:52 EST



在 2021/7/13 下午7:31, Dan Carpenter 写道:
On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 04:46:52PM +0800, Xie Yongji wrote:
@@ -613,37 +618,28 @@ static void vhost_vdpa_unmap(struct vhost_vdpa *v, u64 iova, u64 size)
}
}
-static int vhost_vdpa_process_iotlb_update(struct vhost_vdpa *v,
- struct vhost_iotlb_msg *msg)
+static int vhost_vdpa_pa_map(struct vhost_vdpa *v,
+ u64 iova, u64 size, u64 uaddr, u32 perm)
{
struct vhost_dev *dev = &v->vdev;
- struct vhost_iotlb *iotlb = dev->iotlb;
struct page **page_list;
unsigned long list_size = PAGE_SIZE / sizeof(struct page *);
unsigned int gup_flags = FOLL_LONGTERM;
unsigned long npages, cur_base, map_pfn, last_pfn = 0;
unsigned long lock_limit, sz2pin, nchunks, i;
- u64 iova = msg->iova;
+ u64 start = iova;
long pinned;
int ret = 0;
- if (msg->iova < v->range.first ||
- msg->iova + msg->size - 1 > v->range.last)
- return -EINVAL;
This is not related to your patch, but can the "msg->iova + msg->size"
addition can have an integer overflow. From looking at the callers it
seems like it can. msg comes from:
vhost_chr_write_iter()
--> dev->msg_handler(dev, &msg);
--> vhost_vdpa_process_iotlb_msg()
--> vhost_vdpa_process_iotlb_update()


Yes.



If I'm thinking of the right thing then these are allowed to overflow to
0 because of the " - 1" but not further than that. I believe the check
needs to be something like:

if (msg->iova < v->range.first ||
msg->iova - 1 > U64_MAX - msg->size ||


I guess we don't need - 1 here?

Thanks


msg->iova + msg->size - 1 > v->range.last)

But writing integer overflow check correctly is notoriously difficult.
Do you think you could send a fix for that which is separate from the
patcheset? We'd want to backport it to stable.

regards,
dan carpenter