| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 08:44:35 +0100
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...e.com>
To: "Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk" <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Cc: "Stefano Stabellini" <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>,
"axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] xen/blkfront: Add BUG_ON to deal
with misbehaving backends.
>>> On 31.05.12 at 20:17, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com> wrote:
> The blkfront_remove part is .. that is going to take some surgery to do
> and I don't think I am going to be able to attempt that within the next
> couple
> of weeks. So lets put that on the TODO list and just do this one?
That sounds okay to me.
> From 4aabb5b44778fc0c0b8d4f5a2e2cd8e8490064d7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
> Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 17:34:51 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH] xen/blkfront: Add WARN to deal with misbehaving backends.
>
> Part of the ring structure is the 'id' field which is under
> control of the frontend. The frontend stamps it with "some"
> value (this some in this implementation being a value less
> than BLK_RING_SIZE), and when it gets a response expects
> said value to be in the response structure. We have a check
> for the id field when spolling new requests but not when
> de-spolling responses.
>
> We also add an extra check in add_id_to_freelist to make
> sure that the 'struct request' was not NULL - as we cannot
> pass a NULL to __blk_end_request_all, otherwise that crashes
> (and all the operations that the response is dealing with
> end up with __blk_end_request_all).
>
> Lastly we also print the name of the operation that failed.
>
> [v1: s/BUG/WARN/ suggested by Stefano]
That's only partly true, since ...
> [v2: Add extra check in add_id_to_freelist]
> Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
> ---
> drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> 1 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c b/drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c
> index 60eed4b..c7ef8a4 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c
> @@ -144,11 +144,22 @@ static int get_id_from_freelist(struct blkfront_info
> *info)
> static void add_id_to_freelist(struct blkfront_info *info,
> unsigned long id)
> {
> + BUG_ON(info->shadow[id].req.u.rw.id != id);
> info->shadow[id].req.u.rw.id = info->shadow_free;
> + BUG_ON(info->shadow[id].request == NULL);
... there's now even two BUG_ON()s here. I would think these
checks should either happen at the call site, or the function
should return an error indication; in any case should these just
result in warnings just like the out-of-range check you added.
> info->shadow[id].request = NULL;
> info->shadow_free = id;
> }
>
> +static const char *op_name(int op)
> +{
> + const char *names[BLKIF_OP_DISCARD+1] = {
static const char *const names[] = {
> + "read" , "write", "barrier", "flush", "reserved", "discard"};
Perhaps using dedicated initializers would be preferable here?
> +
> + if (op > BLKIF_OP_DISCARD)
if (op >= ARRAY_SIZE(names))
(all three adjustments making future additions less intrusive -
they could be single-line then).
Jan
> + return "unknown";
> + return names[op];
> +}
> static int xlbd_reserve_minors(unsigned int minor, unsigned int nr)
> {
> unsigned int end = minor + nr;
> @@ -746,6 +757,18 @@ static irqreturn_t blkif_interrupt(int irq, void
> *dev_id)
>
> bret = RING_GET_RESPONSE(&info->ring, i);
> id = bret->id;
> + /*
> + * The backend has messed up and given us an id that we would
> + * never have given to it (we stamp it up to BLK_RING_SIZE -
> + * look in get_id_from_freelist.
> + */
> + if (id >= BLK_RING_SIZE) {
> + /* We can't safely get the 'struct request' as
> + * the id is busted. So limp along. */
> + WARN(1, "%s: response to %s has incorrect id (%d)!\n",
> + info->gd->disk_name, op_name(bret->operation), id);
> + continue;
> + }
> req = info->shadow[id].request;
>
> if (bret->operation != BLKIF_OP_DISCARD)
> @@ -758,8 +781,8 @@ static irqreturn_t blkif_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
> case BLKIF_OP_DISCARD:
> if (unlikely(bret->status == BLKIF_RSP_EOPNOTSUPP)) {
> struct request_queue *rq = info->rq;
> - printk(KERN_WARNING "blkfront: %s: discard op failed\n",
> - info->gd->disk_name);
> + printk(KERN_WARNING "blkfront: %s: %s op failed\n",
> + info->gd->disk_name, op_name(bret->operation));
> error = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> info->feature_discard = 0;
> info->feature_secdiscard = 0;
> @@ -771,18 +794,14 @@ static irqreturn_t blkif_interrupt(int irq, void
> *dev_id)
> case BLKIF_OP_FLUSH_DISKCACHE:
> case BLKIF_OP_WRITE_BARRIER:
> if (unlikely(bret->status == BLKIF_RSP_EOPNOTSUPP)) {
> - printk(KERN_WARNING "blkfront: %s: write %s op failed\n",
> - info->flush_op == BLKIF_OP_WRITE_BARRIER ?
> - "barrier" : "flush disk cache",
> - info->gd->disk_name);
> + printk(KERN_WARNING "blkfront: %s: %s op failed\n",
> + info->gd->disk_name, op_name(bret->operation));
> error = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> }
> if (unlikely(bret->status == BLKIF_RSP_ERROR &&
> info->shadow[id].req.u.rw.nr_segments == 0)) {
> - printk(KERN_WARNING "blkfront: %s: empty write %s op failed\n",
> - info->flush_op == BLKIF_OP_WRITE_BARRIER ?
> - "barrier" : "flush disk cache",
> - info->gd->disk_name);
> + printk(KERN_WARNING "blkfront: %s: empty %s op failed\n",
> + info->gd->disk_name, op_name(bret->operation));
> error = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> }
> if (unlikely(error)) {
> --
> 1.7.7.6
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists