From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59337)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mreitz@redhat.com>) id 1XFSWU-0007gm-2p
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Aug 2014 14:34:52 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mreitz@redhat.com>) id 1XFSWN-0001Pi-Om
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Aug 2014 14:34:45 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:2041)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mreitz@redhat.com>) id 1XFSWN-0001PY-Hj
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Aug 2014 14:34:39 -0400
Message-ID: <53E3C6B3.5030300@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 20:34:27 +0200
From: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1403624224-2084-1-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <1403624224-2084-1-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 00/21] block: Handle failure for
 potentially large allocations
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: benoit.canet@irqsave.net, maxa@catit.be, stefanha@redhat.com

On 24.06.2014 17:36, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> A not too small part of the recent CVEs were DoS scenarios by letting
> qemu abort with too large memory allocations. We generally "fixed" thes=
e
> cases by setting some limits on values read from image files that
> influence the size of allocations.
>
> Because we still need to allow reading large images, this works only to
> a certain degree and we still can get fairly large allocations, which
> are not unthinkable to fail on some machines.
>
> This series converts potentially large allocations to g_try_malloc() an=
d
> friends and handles failure gracefully e.g. by returning -ENOMEM. This
> may cause hot-plug of a new disk or individual requests to fail, but th=
e
> VM as a whole can keep running.

Ping =E2=80=93 is there anything missing here? This series does contain o=
ne=20
patch from me, so I'm naturally interested in seeing this series getting=20
merged. ;-)

Max