| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1707051336070.2919@sstabellini-ThinkPad-X260>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 13:43:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>
To: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
xen-devel@...ts.xen.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com,
Stefano Stabellini <stefano@...reto.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 06/18] xen/pvcalls: handle commands from the
frontend
On Tue, 4 Jul 2017, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 03/07/17 23:08, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > When the other end notifies us that there are commands to be read
> > (pvcalls_back_event), wake up the backend thread to parse the command.
> >
> > The command ring works like most other Xen rings, so use the usual
> > ring macros to read and write to it. The functions implementing the
> > commands are empty stubs for now.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano@...reto.com>
> > CC: boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com
> > CC: jgross@...e.com
> > ---
> > drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c | 144 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 129 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c b/drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c
> > index e4c2e46..9e00971 100644
> > --- a/drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c
> > +++ b/drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c
> > @@ -47,16 +47,135 @@ struct pvcalls_fedata {
> > struct list_head socket_mappings;
> > struct radix_tree_root socketpass_mappings;
> > struct semaphore socket_lock;
> > - struct workqueue_struct *wq;
> > - struct work_struct register_work;
I realize that this changes should actually be folded in the previous
patch (wq and register_work shouldn't be added in the first place). I'll
fix the patches.
> > };
> >
> > -static void pvcalls_back_work(struct work_struct *work)
> > +static int pvcalls_back_socket(struct xenbus_device *dev,
> > + struct xen_pvcalls_request *req)
> > {
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int pvcalls_back_connect(struct xenbus_device *dev,
> > + struct xen_pvcalls_request *req)
> > +{
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int pvcalls_back_release(struct xenbus_device *dev,
> > + struct xen_pvcalls_request *req)
> > +{
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int pvcalls_back_bind(struct xenbus_device *dev,
> > + struct xen_pvcalls_request *req)
> > +{
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int pvcalls_back_listen(struct xenbus_device *dev,
> > + struct xen_pvcalls_request *req)
> > +{
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int pvcalls_back_accept(struct xenbus_device *dev,
> > + struct xen_pvcalls_request *req)
> > +{
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int pvcalls_back_poll(struct xenbus_device *dev,
> > + struct xen_pvcalls_request *req)
> > +{
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int pvcalls_back_handle_cmd(struct xenbus_device *dev,
> > + struct xen_pvcalls_request *req)
> > +{
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + switch (req->cmd) {
> > + case PVCALLS_SOCKET:
> > + ret = pvcalls_back_socket(dev, req);
> > + break;
> > + case PVCALLS_CONNECT:
> > + ret = pvcalls_back_connect(dev, req);
> > + break;
> > + case PVCALLS_RELEASE:
> > + ret = pvcalls_back_release(dev, req);
> > + break;
> > + case PVCALLS_BIND:
> > + ret = pvcalls_back_bind(dev, req);
> > + break;
> > + case PVCALLS_LISTEN:
> > + ret = pvcalls_back_listen(dev, req);
> > + break;
> > + case PVCALLS_ACCEPT:
> > + ret = pvcalls_back_accept(dev, req);
> > + break;
> > + case PVCALLS_POLL:
> > + ret = pvcalls_back_poll(dev, req);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + {
> > + struct pvcalls_fedata *fedata;
> > + struct xen_pvcalls_response *rsp;
> > +
> > + fedata = dev_get_drvdata(&dev->dev);
> > + rsp = RING_GET_RESPONSE(
> > + &fedata->ring, fedata->ring.rsp_prod_pvt++);
> > + rsp->req_id = req->req_id;
> > + rsp->cmd = req->cmd;
> > + rsp->ret = -ENOTSUPP;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + }
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void pvcalls_back_work(struct pvcalls_fedata *fedata)
> > +{
> > + int notify, notify_all = 0, more = 1;
> > + struct xen_pvcalls_request req;
> > + struct xenbus_device *dev = fedata->dev;
> > +
> > + while (more) {
> > + while (RING_HAS_UNCONSUMED_REQUESTS(&fedata->ring)) {
> > + RING_COPY_REQUEST(&fedata->ring,
> > + fedata->ring.req_cons++,
> > + &req);
> > +
> > + if (!pvcalls_back_handle_cmd(dev, &req)) {
> > + RING_PUSH_RESPONSES_AND_CHECK_NOTIFY(
> > + &fedata->ring, notify);
> > + notify_all += notify;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (notify_all) {
> > + notify_remote_via_irq(fedata->irq);
> > + notify_all = 0;
> > + }
> > +
> > + RING_FINAL_CHECK_FOR_REQUESTS(&fedata->ring, more);
> > + }
> > }
> >
> > static irqreturn_t pvcalls_back_event(int irq, void *dev_id)
> > {
> > + struct xenbus_device *dev = dev_id;
> > + struct pvcalls_fedata *fedata = NULL;
> > +
> > + if (dev == NULL)
> > + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > +
> > + fedata = dev_get_drvdata(&dev->dev);
> > + if (fedata == NULL)
> > + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > +
> > + pvcalls_back_work(fedata);
> > return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -87,18 +206,15 @@ static int backend_connect(struct xenbus_device *dev)
> > goto error;
> > }
> >
> > - err = bind_interdomain_evtchn_to_irqhandler(dev->otherend_id, evtchn,
> > - pvcalls_back_event, 0,
> > - "pvcalls-backend", dev);
> > + err = bind_interdomain_evtchn_to_irq(dev->otherend_id, evtchn);
> > if (err < 0)
> > goto error;
> > fedata->irq = err;
> > -
> > - fedata->wq = alloc_workqueue("pvcalls_back_wq", WQ_UNBOUND, 1);
> > - if (!fedata->wq) {
> > - err = -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > + err = request_threaded_irq(fedata->irq, NULL, pvcalls_back_event,
> > + IRQF_ONESHOT, "pvcalls-back", dev);
> > + if (err < 0)
> > goto error;
> > - }
> >
> > err = xenbus_map_ring_valloc(dev, &ring_ref, 1, (void**)&fedata->sring);
> > if (err < 0)
> > @@ -107,7 +223,6 @@ static int backend_connect(struct xenbus_device *dev)
> > BACK_RING_INIT(&fedata->ring, fedata->sring, XEN_PAGE_SIZE * 1);
> > fedata->dev = dev;
> >
> > - INIT_WORK(&fedata->register_work, pvcalls_back_work);
> > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&fedata->socket_mappings);
> > INIT_RADIX_TREE(&fedata->socketpass_mappings, GFP_KERNEL);
> > sema_init(&fedata->socket_lock, 1);
> > @@ -116,15 +231,14 @@ static int backend_connect(struct xenbus_device *dev)
> > down(&pvcalls_back_global.frontends_lock);
> > list_add_tail(&fedata->list, &pvcalls_back_global.frontends);
> > up(&pvcalls_back_global.frontends_lock);
> > - queue_work(fedata->wq, &fedata->register_work);
> > +
> > + pvcalls_back_work(fedata);
>
> Is this call really necessary? I believe this is racy in case an event
> is coming in at the same time.
No, it is not. I'll remove it.
> >
> > return 0;
> >
> > error:
> > if (fedata->sring != NULL)
> > xenbus_unmap_ring_vfree(dev, fedata->sring);
> > - if (fedata->wq)
> > - destroy_workqueue(fedata->wq);
> > unbind_from_irqhandler(fedata->irq, dev);
>
> Is it secure to unbind the irq handler _after_ unmapping the ring?
Good point, I'll change the order.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists