From: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
To: vyasevic@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: stefanha@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] rtl8139: correctly track full receive buffer in standard mode
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2015 11:15:36 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55E51858.40607@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55E4638E.3090404@redhat.com>
On 08/31/2015 10:24 PM, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
> On 08/31/2015 05:59 AM, Jason Wang wrote:
>>
>> On 08/28/2015 10:06 PM, Vladislav Yasevich wrote:
>>> In standard operation mode, when the receive ring buffer
>>> is full, the buffer actually appears empty to the driver since
>>> the RxBufAddr (the location we wirte new data to) and RxBufPtr
>>> (the location guest would stat reading from) are the same.
>>> As a result, the call to rtl8139_RxBufferEmpty ends up
>>> returning true indicating that the receive buffer is empty.
>>> This would result in the next packet overwriting the recevie buffer
>>> again and stalling receive operations.
>>>
>>> This patch tracks the number of unread bytes in the rxbuffer
>>> using an unused C+ register. On every read and write, the
>>> number is adjsted and the special case of a full buffer is also
>>> trapped.
>>>
>>> The C+ register trick is used to simplify migration and not require
>>> a new machine type. This register is not used in regular mode
>>> and C+ mode doesn't have the same issue.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Vladislav Yasevich <vyasevic@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>> hw/net/rtl8139.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>>> 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> I'm not sure this can happen. For example, looks like the following
>> check in rtl8139_do_receive():
>>
>> if (avail != 0 && size + 8 >= avail)
>> {
>>
>> can guarantee there's no overwriting?
>>
> The problem is the calculation of avail. When the buffer is full,
> avail will be the the size of the receive buffer. So the test
> above will be false because the driver thinks there is actually
> enough room.
>
> With his patch, 'avail' will be calculated to 0.
>
> -vlad
>
If believe the condition size + 8 >= avail can guarantee that the buffer
won't be full (if we allow size + 8 == avail, buffer will be full)? So
avail == 0 means the buffer is empty. Or is there anything I miss?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-01 3:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-28 14:06 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 0/2] rtl8139: Fix buffer overflow in standard mode Vladislav Yasevich
2015-08-28 14:06 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 1/2] rtl8139: Do not consume the packet during " Vladislav Yasevich
2015-08-28 14:06 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] rtl8139: correctly track full receive buffer " Vladislav Yasevich
2015-08-31 9:59 ` Jason Wang
2015-08-31 14:24 ` Vlad Yasevich
2015-09-01 3:15 ` Jason Wang [this message]
2015-09-01 11:29 ` Vlad Yasevich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=55E51858.40607@redhat.com \
--to=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
--cc=vyasevic@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).