netdev - Re: [PATCH iwl-net 5/8] i40e: fix validation of VF state in get resources

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <082137af-95a4-4ad6-b9c1-050e46cb52c0@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2025 22:02:37 +0200
From: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
To: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
CC: <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>, Tony Nguyen
	<anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Greg KH
	<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, <jeremiah.kyle@...el.com>,
	<leszek.pepiak@...el.com>, Lukasz Czapnik <lukasz.czapnik@...el.com>,
	Aleksandr Loktionov <aleksandr.loktionov@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-net 5/8] i40e: fix validation of VF state in get
 resources

On 8/26/25 18:33, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 12:45:15PM +0200, Przemek Kitszel wrote:
>> From: Lukasz Czapnik <lukasz.czapnik@...el.com>
>>
>> VF state I40E_VF_STATE_ACTIVE is not the only state in which
>> VF is actually active so it should not be used to determine
>> if a VF is allowed to obtain resources.
>>
>> Use I40E_VF_STATE_RESOURCES_LOADED that is set only in
>> i40e_vc_get_vf_resources_msg() and cleared during reset.
>>
>> Fixes: 61125b8be85d ("i40e: Fix failed opcode appearing if handling messages from VF")

my initial conclusion was that the above commit changed behavior so it 
opened up a window for the second get-resources message...

> 
> I suspect this could be
> 
> Fixes: 5c3c48ac6bf5 ("i40e: implement virtual device interface")

... while the original impl (your proposal to blame here), while buggy,
would error out more often

> 
> But I guess that either way is fine.

that is also true, so I didn't spent too much time on this
other reasoning is "Fixes: tag should be used to point to a commit that
needs patching", and picking either one here would result in the very
same outcome (the later patch would be applied as a dependency of the
current (5/8) fix)

> 
>> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Czapnik <lukasz.czapnik@...el.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Aleksandr Loktionov <aleksandr.loktionov@...el.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>

thank you again for reviewing this