From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Werner Kasselman <werner@verivus.ai>
Cc: Trond Myklebust <trondmy@kernel.org>,
Anna Schumaker <anna@kernel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
"linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"stable@vger.kernel.org" <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] pnfs/blocklayout: validate volume indices and limit recursion depth
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2026 07:15:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260423051517.GC27929@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260421100338.1227152-2-werner@verivus.com>
On Tue, Apr 21, 2026 at 10:03:42AM +0000, Werner Kasselman wrote:
> #define PNFS_BLOCK_MAX_UUIDS 4
> #define PNFS_BLOCK_MAX_DEVICES 64
> +#define PNFS_BLOCK_MAX_DEPTH 16
I think we can and should reduce the nesting depth. The only really
useful nesting is mirroring + striping or concatenation. Giving a little
extra slack is fine, but I think 4 (or 8 if you insist) should be
enough,
> + int depth, gfp_t gfp_mask);
unsigned?
> default:
> @@ -559,6 +581,9 @@ bl_alloc_deviceid_node(struct nfs_server *server, struct pnfs_device *pdev,
> goto out_free_scratch;
> nr_volumes = be32_to_cpup(p++);
>
> + if (nr_volumes <= 0)
> + goto out_free_scratch;
nr_volumes should be siwtched to an unsigned value, as it is over
the wire.
Otherwise looks good, thanks a lot!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-23 5:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-21 10:03 [PATCH 0/2] pnfs/blocklayout: harden GETDEVICEINFO volume parser Werner Kasselman
2026-04-21 10:03 ` [PATCH 1/2] pnfs/blocklayout: validate volume indices and limit recursion depth Werner Kasselman
2026-04-23 5:15 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2026-04-21 10:03 ` [PATCH 2/2] pnfs/blocklayout: cap total parse operations in volume topology Werner Kasselman
2026-04-23 5:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-04-23 5:20 ` [PATCH 0/2] pnfs/blocklayout: harden GETDEVICEINFO volume parser Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260423051517.GC27929@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=anna@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trondmy@kernel.org \
--cc=werner@verivus.ai \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.