From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists1p.gnu.org (lists1p.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCB71C5DF89 for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2026 13:35:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists1p.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1wxPOq-0006Mq-GX; Fri, 21 Aug 2026 09:35:12 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists1p.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1wxPOo-0006HN-FC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 Aug 2026 09:35:10 -0400 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de ([195.135.223.130]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1wxPOm-00009R-Pv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 Aug 2026 09:35:10 -0400 Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (unknown [10.150.64.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF0A6856B2; Fri, 21 Aug 2026 13:34:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1787319303; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=vn7H2vGU5QAWOyCXJSOS0VoQ7NBJXw4HYZ/bXhJRivY=; b=ExjejKAJYKn9KOwrPPsTibmRgnlhlQ/33vujKLv+NzAU/1yFCl/gAetO5ekRmbJ7IniJ3n vcozH5s7pgKbtn4IXwKV8doThKB7VEk4IDLCvVdS51oI/eMf66KTNu3KFSkpyjTT0IRzhI GJdYDz6hC/Co17VCp/RFsOb6xI5cMPk= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1787319303; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=vn7H2vGU5QAWOyCXJSOS0VoQ7NBJXw4HYZ/bXhJRivY=; b=Tfgza51j6eSY5tAfesVL7GGaUGhB2Qifnocp9ShM2M0LKDGyi6ein/PTbQaILFxzg8at6F zpJCN720lJPFnrBw== Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1787319298; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=vn7H2vGU5QAWOyCXJSOS0VoQ7NBJXw4HYZ/bXhJRivY=; b=erXhWjVaWdvWpq0Z5Vv5WBqibWn+HBroLcyK4cncGyQGjisGvSelsOxvr+0Uv7nArbD4gy i9qIUx5MUrCmHZLKaUMTXuyN0BMSSlX6sQAv4ruSB57nSbPXIGmEKqsyMufxTm0OjP6uF4 vPGBzYH4kUHO6bu2Nb6fQiTYc0rUhyQ= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1787319298; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=vn7H2vGU5QAWOyCXJSOS0VoQ7NBJXw4HYZ/bXhJRivY=; b=SWlBQLubjKX4cktz3JtURE0AQXajT//rbWtF2MMKu3rUHTK5aBseKveQ+qYUzrCC73y4sq FkYMDk/qcO/bSzCw== Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 80E143329; Fri, 21 Aug 2026 13:34:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id v0HGFAJUiGqCHQAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Fri, 21 Aug 2026 13:34:58 +0000 From: Fabiano Rosas To: Peter Xu , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: Jack Wang , Peter Xu , Li Zhijian , Juraj Marcin , Samuel Zhang , Yanfei Xu , Jinpu Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/10] migration/rdma: Sanity check upper bound of register MR address In-Reply-To: <20260820200322.3321036-10-peterx@redhat.com> References: <20260820200322.3321036-1-peterx@redhat.com> <20260820200322.3321036-10-peterx@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2026 10:34:52 -0300 Message-ID: <877bljlhqb.fsf@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.30 / 50.00]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[99.99%]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCPT_COUNT_SEVEN(0.00)[9]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.de:s=susede2_rsa,suse.de:s=susede2_ed25519]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[ionos.com:email, gitlab.com:url, imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:helo, suse.de:mid, suse.de:email] Received-SPF: pass client-ip=195.135.223.130; envelope-from=farosas@suse.de; helo=smtp-out1.suse.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: qemu development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Peter Xu writes: > Before registration of RDMA ranges, QEMU destination checks for validity of > current_addr no less than the target ramblock's start address. But it > didn't check for the upper bound to make sure the address is within the > size of the ramblock. Add it. > > Reported-by: Tristan (@TristanInSec) > Closes: https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/work_items/4007 > Reviewed-by: Jinpu Wang > Signed-off-by: Peter Xu > --- > migration/rdma.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/migration/rdma.c b/migration/rdma.c > index cf6688a4bc..d8953363fe 100644 > --- a/migration/rdma.c > +++ b/migration/rdma.c > @@ -3387,7 +3387,8 @@ int rdma_registration_handle(QEMUFile *f) > goto err; > } > block = &(rdma->local_ram_blocks.block[reg->current_index]); > - if (block->offset > reg->current_addr) { > + if (block->offset > reg->current_addr || > + block->offset + block->length <= reg->current_addr) { > error_report("rdma: bad register address for block %s" > " offset: %" PRIx64 " current_addr: %" PRIx64, > block->block_name, block->offset, Reviewed-by: Fabiano Rosas