From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8293733F595; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 07:42:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.12 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777448560; cv=none; b=mV41lUTo7Ds6pp3reCgplzyWQ+Q/XiW/ttBIkZxD1yenm5l6uzJZEZfMeBW3vuJ6BwGVvYOEy7LNe1Q7elJsAznF266t1Yg1HE1se/cjRVZnhvDAJ6wZxlDaQKC85PIzXZRcx/3IHyMT6Zgg3ZnAnr7PkfWqneOHaxzKySnptD0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777448560; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Cr0vQaNUqcHT5qkJDPRkR29t4xZtKhdC8p1BUKcPsvY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=MckWfqsT1a0V/HttIOy5JCql6x8mTLYMFDdLtEWxnwX7+tQTFofL4UQ4utjyY8CyD9q8mDqeyp2WncQFr5yYXUsZ7XT3mZyblCzS0bsFTpQBROCALiR+o3Kfuqlr2B6BozyUJXsLfbbmx5syN42Ht64fg6c0ZWssel07XFzoXgA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=i/z50MRc; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.12 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="i/z50MRc" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1777448559; x=1808984559; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding; bh=Cr0vQaNUqcHT5qkJDPRkR29t4xZtKhdC8p1BUKcPsvY=; b=i/z50MRc5q2gQA6wuQLdhj5dGsVknE5cJHbKtL1pnYfD+F87QKbE83FQ SCo8CKimzyx5r6T6BvYMZD5uyjoWTB7sKjSPa0QKd1CoOLmK2VObPAZLG jASbeew4pA59oEfZH4UrgqW/f6k6n8ozHRDd1vN2HoU2uPHTO0bM+Kf8T Y1GWIByLlD0W2njhwJN7ndkzyIMhwSeFepUWcBdcY/wCuNagNAJlQyFzx A5vGgf2TuyGTbGpxVTT60t/7GTZgL7w+4ssSATGaroBSqLZfP+7sO2Ob6 huVwSBef9P6+zilPmykd7GQQr7zPF1Iskjd3dZsts0UQn3HbUtrzc4EN5 Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: gRVlTk6kTxqR7JDR6118CA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: j7VumaU9S+y4/NzqOqkbRA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11770"; a="89833758" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.23,205,1770624000"; d="scan'208";a="89833758" Received: from fmviesa004.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.144]) by orvoesa104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Apr 2026 00:42:38 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 8EIVIcpZRqitLPI+BaAevg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: CeyFazFEQhSIaQZgcZd+ww== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.23,205,1770624000"; d="scan'208";a="235968120" Received: from irvmail002.ir.intel.com ([10.43.11.120]) by fmviesa004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 29 Apr 2026 00:42:35 -0700 Received: from mglak.igk.intel.com (mglak.igk.intel.com [10.237.112.146]) by irvmail002.ir.intel.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A62A27BA2; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 08:42:32 +0100 (IST) From: Larysa Zaremba To: intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, Jacob Keller Cc: Przemek Kitszel , Andrew Lunn , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Joshua Hay , Willem de Bruijn , Alice Michael , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Aleksandr Loktionov , Larysa Zaremba , Tony Nguyen Subject: [PATCH iwl-net] idpf: fix RSS LUT memcpy size Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2026 09:42:30 +0200 Message-ID: <20260429074232.180528-1-larysa.zaremba@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.0 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Based on the following feedback from Sashiko (received for iXD phase 1 patchset, but valid for the net tree): "Is the bounds check xn_params.recv_mem.iov_len < lut_buf_size sufficient? Since lut_buf_size only represents the size of the array elements, should this check instead verify that the payload is at least sizeof(struct virtchnl2_rss_lut) + lut_buf_size? [...] Does memcpy copy the correct amount of data here? rss_lut_size stores the number of 32-bit entries, not the size in bytes. Should it use lut_buf_size or rss_data->rss_lut_size * sizeof(u32) instead?" After inspecting the code, it was concluded that RSS memcpy size is in fact 4 times smaller than it has to be, since a single array entry in a u32, and rss_data->rss_lut_size is clearly used as an array size. Required Rx buffer size is also too small, but this is a common issue in the idpf code. Use a full buffer size (lut_buf_size) instead of the array length (rss_data->rss_lut_size) when doing memcpy of RSS lookup table. While at it, increase required Rx buffer size to a whole flex-array containing structure instead of just the array. Link: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260323174052.5355-1-larysa.zaremba%40intel.com?part=8 Fixes: 95af467d9a4e ("idpf: configure resources for RX queues") Reviewed-by: Aleksandr Loktionov Signed-off-by: Larysa Zaremba --- drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_virtchnl.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_virtchnl.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_virtchnl.c index be66f9b2e101..a97d2e9b54d4 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_virtchnl.c +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_virtchnl.c @@ -2916,7 +2916,7 @@ int idpf_send_get_set_rss_lut_msg(struct idpf_adapter *adapter, return -EIO; lut_buf_size = le16_to_cpu(recv_rl->lut_entries) * sizeof(u32); - if (reply_sz < lut_buf_size) + if (reply_sz < lut_buf_size + sizeof(struct virtchnl2_rss_lut)) return -EIO; /* size didn't change, we can reuse existing lut buf */ @@ -2933,7 +2933,7 @@ int idpf_send_get_set_rss_lut_msg(struct idpf_adapter *adapter, } do_memcpy: - memcpy(rss_data->rss_lut, recv_rl->lut, rss_data->rss_lut_size); + memcpy(rss_data->rss_lut, recv_rl->lut, lut_buf_size); return 0; } -- 2.47.0