linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] virtio_balloon: Introduce memory recover

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: <fdbdb249-8f8f-5ca9-509c-6b4a4b94236a@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 30 May 2022 09:53:30 +0200
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     zhenwei pi <pizhenwei@...edance.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, naoya.horiguchi@....com, mst@...hat.com,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        jasowang@...hat.com, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        pbonzini@...hat.com, peterx@...hat.com, qemu-devel@...gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] virtio_balloon: Introduce memory recover

On 25.05.22 01:32, zhenwei pi wrote:
> 
> 
> On 5/25/22 03:35, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> On Fri, May 20, 2022, zhenwei pi wrote:
>>> @@ -59,6 +60,12 @@ enum virtio_balloon_config_read {
>>>   	VIRTIO_BALLOON_CONFIG_READ_CMD_ID = 0,
>>>   };
>>>   
>>> +/* the request body to commucate with host side */
>>> +struct __virtio_balloon_recover {
>>> +	struct virtio_balloon_recover vbr;
>>> +	__virtio32 pfns[VIRTIO_BALLOON_PAGES_PER_PAGE];
>>
>> I assume this is copied from virtio_balloon.pfns, which also uses __virtio32, but
>> isn't that horribly broken?  PFNs are 'unsigned long', i.e. 64 bits on 64-bit kernels.
>> x86-64 at least most definitely generates 64-bit PFNs.  Unless there's magic I'm
>> missing, page_to_balloon_pfn() will truncate PFNs and feed the host bad info.
>>
> 
> Yes, I also noticed this point, I suppose the balloon device can not 
> work on a virtual machine which has physical address larger than 16T.

Yes, that's a historical artifact and we never ran into it in practice
-- because 16TB VMs are still rare, especially when paired with
virtio-balloon inflation/deflation. Most probably the guest should just
stop inflating when hitting such a big PFN. In the future, we might want
a proper sg interface instead.

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb