linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] nvme-rdma: handle nvme completion data length

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20201024073621.GA28151@lst.de>
Date:   Sat, 24 Oct 2020 09:36:21 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>
Cc:     zhenwei pi <pizhenwei@...edance.com>, kbusch@...nel.org,
        hch@....de, axboe@...com, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] nvme-rdma: handle nvme completion data length

On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 11:01:40AM -0700, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
>>   +	/* received data length checking */
>> +	if (unlikely(wc->byte_len < len)) {
>> +		/* zero bytes message could be ignored */
>> +		if (!wc->byte_len) {
>> +			nvme_rdma_post_recv(queue, qe);
>> +			return;
>> +		}
>
> Nothing in the spec defines zero-length messages, hence we cannot
> support something that is not standard. If your array needs this,
> please submit a TPAR to the NVMe TWG.

We'll still need sanity checking instead of the recount underflow,
I think tearing down the connection here and kicking off error recovery
is probably the best idea.