Re: [BUG/RFC] vhost: net: big endian viring access despite virtio 1

[Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>]

On Fri, 27 Jan 2017 13:24:13 +0100
Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> On 01/26/2017 08:20 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 06:39:14PM +0100, Halil Pasic wrote:  
> >>
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> Recently I have been investigating some strange migration problems on
> >> s390x.
> >>
> >> It turned out under certain circumstances vhost_net corrupts avail.idx by
> >> using wrong endianness.  
> 
> [..]
> 
> >> -------------------------8<--------------  
> >> >From b26e2bbdc03832a0204ee2b42967a1b49a277dc8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001  
> >> From: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >> Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 00:06:15 +0100
> >> Subject: [PATCH] vhost: remove useless/dangerous reset of is_le
> >>
> >> The reset of is_le does no good, but it contributes its fair share to a
> >> bug in vhost_net, which occurs if we have some oldubufs when stopping and
> >> setting a fd = -1 as a backend. Instead of doing something convoluted in
> >> vhost_net, let's just get rid of the reset.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >> Fixes: commit 2751c9882b94 
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/vhost/vhost.c | 4 +---
> >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
> >> index d643260..08072a2 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
> >> @@ -1714,10 +1714,8 @@ int vhost_vq_init_access(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
> >>         int r;
> >>         bool is_le = vq->is_le;
> >>
> >> -       if (!vq->private_data) {
> >> -               vhost_reset_is_le(vq);
> >> +       if (!vq->private_data)
> >>                 return 0;
> >> -       }
> >>
> >>         vhost_init_is_le(vq);  
> > 
> > 
> > I think you do need to reset it, just maybe within vhost_init_is_le.
> > 
> >         if (vhost_has_feature(vq, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1))
> >                 vq->is_le = true;
> > 	else
> > 		vhost_reset_is_le(vq);
> > 
> >   
> 
> That is a very good point! I have overlooked that while the 
> CONFIG_VHOST_CROSS_ENDIAN_LEGACY variant
> 
> static void vhost_init_is_le(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
> {
>         /* Note for legacy virtio: user_be is initialized at reset time
>          * according to the host endianness. If userspace does not set an
>          * explicit endianness, the default behavior is native endian, as
>          * expected by legacy virtio.
>          */
>         vq->is_le = vhost_has_feature(vq, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1) || !vq->user_be;
> }
> 
> is fine the other variant 
> 
> static void vhost_init_is_le(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
> {
>         if (vhost_has_feature(vq, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1))
>                 vq->is_le = true;
> }
> is a very strange initializer (makes assumptions about the state
> to be initialized).
> 
> I agree, setting native endianness there sounds very reasonable.
> 
> I have a question regarding readability. IMHO the relationship
> of reset_is_le and int_is_le is a bit confusing, and I'm afraid
> it could become even more confusing with using reset in one of
> the init_is_le's.
> 
> How about we do the following?
> 
> static void vhost_init_is_le(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
> {
>         if (vhost_has_feature(vq, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1))
>                 vq->is_le = true;
> +       else
> +               vq->is_le = virtio_legacy_is_little_endian();
> 
> }
> 
> static void vhost_reset_is_le(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
> {
> -       vq->is_le = virtio_legacy_is_little_endian();
> +       vhost_init_is_le(vq);
> }
> 
> That way we would have correct endianness both after reset
> and after init, I think :).
> 

Yes, I think this is what we need.

Cheers.

--
Greg

> Thank you very much!
> 
> Halil
> 
>