linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] asm-generic/hyperv: Fix struct hv_message

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20210729165638.f5idr2ag3pdbpd6u@liuwe-devbox-debian-v2>
Date:   Thu, 29 Jul 2021 16:56:38 +0000
From:   Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>
To:     Siddharth Chandrasekaran <sidcha@...zon.de>
Cc:     Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Siddharth Chandrasekaran <sidcha.dev@...il.com>,
        Liran Alon <liran@...zon.com>,
        Ioannis Aslanidis <iaslan@...zon.de>,
        linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@...rosoft.com>,
        Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>,
        Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] asm-generic/hyperv: Fix struct hv_message_header ordering

On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 04:26:54PM +0200, Siddharth Chandrasekaran wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 02:07:05PM +0000, Wei Liu wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 03:52:46PM +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> > > Siddharth Chandrasekaran <sidcha@...zon.de> writes:
> > >
> > > > According to Hyper-V TLFS Version 6.0b, struct hv_message_header members
> > > > should be defined in the order:
> > > >
> > > >     message_type, reserved, message_flags, payload_size
> > > >
> > > > but we have it defined in the order:
> > > >
> > > >     message_type, payload_size, message_flags, reserved
> > > >
> > > > that is, the payload_size and reserved members swapped.
> > >
> > > Indeed,
> > >
> > > typedef struct
> > > {
> > >       HV_MESSAGE_TYPE MessageType;
> > >       UINT16 Reserved;
> > >       HV_MESSAGE_FLAGS MessageFlags;
> > >       UINT8 PayloadSize;
> > >       union
> > >       {
> > >               UINT64 OriginationId;
> > >               HV_PARTITION_ID Sender;
> > >               HV_PORT_ID Port;
> > >       };
> > > } HV_MESSAGE_HEADER;
> > 
> > Well. I think TLFS is wrong. Let me ask around.
> 
> TBH, I hadn't considered that possibility :). I assumed it was a
> regression on our side. But I spent some time tracing the history of that
> struct all the way back to when it was in staging (in 2009) and now I'm
> inclined to believe a later version of TLFS is at fault here.
> 
> Based on what we decide in this thread, I will open an issue on the TLFS
> GitHub repository.
> 

I have confirmation TLFS is wrong and shall be fixed. Feel free to open
an issue on GitHub too.

Wei.