qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	"Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@redhat.com>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Peter Maydell" <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH-for-6.1 v2] softmmu/physmem: fix wrong assertion in qemu_ram_alloc_internal()
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2021 16:52:10 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YRrP+tDsIyL3MaWO@t490s> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210805092350.31195-1-david@redhat.com>

On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 11:23:50AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> When adding RAM_NORESERVE, we forgot to remove the old assertion when
> adding the updated one, most probably when reworking the patches or
> rebasing. We can easily crash QEMU by adding
>   -object memory-backend-ram,id=mem0,size=500G,reserve=off
> to the QEMU cmdline:
>   qemu-system-x86_64: ../softmmu/physmem.c:2146: qemu_ram_alloc_internal:
>   Assertion `(ram_flags & ~(RAM_SHARED | RAM_RESIZEABLE | RAM_PREALLOC))
>   == 0' failed.
> 
> Fix it by removing the old assertion.
> 
> Fixes: 8dbe22c6868b ("memory: Introduce RAM_NORESERVE and wire it up in qemu_ram_mmap()")
> Reviewed-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
> Tested-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
> Cc: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> ---
> 
> v1 -> v2:
> - Added rbs
> - Tagged for 6.1 inclusion
> 
> ---
>  softmmu/physmem.c | 1 -
>  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/softmmu/physmem.c b/softmmu/physmem.c
> index 3c1912a1a0..2e18947598 100644
> --- a/softmmu/physmem.c
> +++ b/softmmu/physmem.c
> @@ -2143,7 +2143,6 @@ RAMBlock *qemu_ram_alloc_internal(ram_addr_t size, ram_addr_t max_size,
>      RAMBlock *new_block;
>      Error *local_err = NULL;
>  
> -    assert((ram_flags & ~(RAM_SHARED | RAM_RESIZEABLE | RAM_PREALLOC)) == 0);
>      assert((ram_flags & ~(RAM_SHARED | RAM_RESIZEABLE | RAM_PREALLOC |
>                            RAM_NORESERVE)) == 0);
>      assert(!host ^ (ram_flags & RAM_PREALLOC));
> -- 
> 2.31.1
> 

Today I just noticed this patch is still missing for 6.1. How many users are
there with reserve=off?  Would it be worth rc4 or not?

-- 
Peter Xu



  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-08-16 21:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-05  9:23 [PATCH-for-6.1 v2] softmmu/physmem: fix wrong assertion in qemu_ram_alloc_internal() David Hildenbrand
2021-08-06  5:04 ` Pankaj Gupta
2021-08-16 20:52 ` Peter Xu [this message]
2021-08-17  7:14   ` David Hildenbrand
2021-08-17 14:25     ` Peter Xu
2021-08-17 15:51     ` Peter Maydell

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=YRrP+tDsIyL3MaWO@t490s \
    --to=peterx@redhat.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
    --cc=philmd@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    /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).