Re: [PATCH 3/5] vhost: support upto 509 memory regions

Igor Mammedov
2015-06-17T16:09:38Z

On Wed, 17 Jun 2015 17:38:40 +0200
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 05:12:57PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Jun 2015 16:32:02 +0200
> > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 03:20:44PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 17/06/2015 15:13, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > > > Considering userspace can be malicious, I guess yes.
> > > > > > I don't think it's a valid concern in this case,
> > > > > > setting limit back from 509 to 64 will not help here in any
> > > > > > way, userspace still can create as many vhost instances as
> > > > > > it needs to consume memory it desires.
> > > > >
> > > > > Not really since vhost char device isn't world-accessible.
> > > > > It's typically opened by a priveledged tool, the fd is
> > > > > then passed to an unpriveledged userspace, or permissions
> > > > > dropped.
> > > >
> > > > Then what's the concern anyway?
> > > >
> > > > Paolo
> > >
> > > Each fd now ties up 16K of kernel memory. It didn't use to, so
> > > priveledged tool could safely give the unpriveledged userspace
> > > a ton of these fds.
> > if privileged tool gives out unlimited amount of fds then it
> > doesn't matter whether fd ties 4K or 16K, host still could be DoSed.
> >
>
> Of course it does not give out unlimited fds, there's a way
> for the sysadmin to specify the number of fds. Look at how libvirt
> uses vhost, it should become clear I think.
then it just means that tool has to take into account a new limits
to partition host in sensible manner.
Exposing limit as module parameter might be of help to tool for
getting/setting it in a way it needs.