[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230131021758-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 02:20:49 -0500
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: Heng Qi <hengqi@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] virtio-net: fix possible unsigned integer
overflow
On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 11:43:37AM +0800, Heng Qi wrote:
> When the single-buffer xdp is loaded and after xdp_linearize_page()
> is called, *num_buf becomes 0 and (*num_buf - 1) may overflow into
> a large integer in virtnet_build_xdp_buff_mrg(), resulting in
> unexpected packet dropping.
>
> Fixes: ef75cb51f139 ("virtio-net: build xdp_buff with multi buffers")
> Signed-off-by: Heng Qi <hengqi@...ux.alibaba.com>
> Reviewed-by: Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>
Given the confusion, just make num_buf an int?
> ---
> drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 7 +++++--
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> index aaa6fe9b214a..a8e9462903fa 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> @@ -1007,6 +1007,9 @@ static int virtnet_build_xdp_buff_mrg(struct net_device *dev,
> xdp_prepare_buff(xdp, buf - VIRTIO_XDP_HEADROOM,
> VIRTIO_XDP_HEADROOM + vi->hdr_len, len - vi->hdr_len, true);
>
> + if (!*num_buf)
> + return 0;
> +
> if (*num_buf > 1) {
> /* If we want to build multi-buffer xdp, we need
> * to specify that the flags of xdp_buff have the
This means truesize won't be set.
> @@ -1020,10 +1023,10 @@ static int virtnet_build_xdp_buff_mrg(struct net_device *dev,
> shinfo->xdp_frags_size = 0;
> }
>
> - if ((*num_buf - 1) > MAX_SKB_FRAGS)
> + if (*num_buf > MAX_SKB_FRAGS + 1)
> return -EINVAL;
Admittedly this is cleaner.
>
> - while ((--*num_buf) >= 1) {
> + while (--*num_buf) {
A bit more fragile, > 0 would be better.
> buf = virtqueue_get_buf_ctx(rq->vq, &len, &ctx);
> if (unlikely(!buf)) {
> pr_debug("%s: rx error: %d buffers out of %d missing\n",
> --
> 2.19.1.6.gb485710b
Powered by blists - more mailing lists