* [PATCH] tpm: fix crash when FD >= 1024
@ 2023-09-11 11:36 marcandre.lureau
2023-09-11 11:45 ` Michael Tokarev
2023-09-11 12:56 ` Stefan Berger
0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: marcandre.lureau @ 2023-09-11 11:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: qemu-devel; +Cc: Marc-André Lureau, Stefan Berger
From: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
Replace select() with poll() to fix a crash when QEMU has a large number
of FDs.
Fixes:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2020133
Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
---
backends/tpm/tpm_util.c | 12 +++---------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/backends/tpm/tpm_util.c b/backends/tpm/tpm_util.c
index a6e6d3e72f..5f4c9f5b6f 100644
--- a/backends/tpm/tpm_util.c
+++ b/backends/tpm/tpm_util.c
@@ -112,12 +112,9 @@ static int tpm_util_request(int fd,
void *response,
size_t responselen)
{
- fd_set readfds;
+ GPollFD fds[1] = { {.fd = fd, .events = G_IO_IN } };
int n;
- struct timeval tv = {
- .tv_sec = 1,
- .tv_usec = 0,
- };
+ int timeout = 1000;
n = write(fd, request, requestlen);
if (n < 0) {
@@ -127,11 +124,8 @@ static int tpm_util_request(int fd,
return -EFAULT;
}
- FD_ZERO(&readfds);
- FD_SET(fd, &readfds);
-
/* wait for a second */
- n = select(fd + 1, &readfds, NULL, NULL, &tv);
+ n = RETRY_ON_EINTR(g_poll(fds, 1, timeout));
if (n != 1) {
return -errno;
}
--
2.41.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] tpm: fix crash when FD >= 1024
2023-09-11 11:36 [PATCH] tpm: fix crash when FD >= 1024 marcandre.lureau
@ 2023-09-11 11:45 ` Michael Tokarev
2023-09-11 12:56 ` Stefan Berger
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Michael Tokarev @ 2023-09-11 11:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: marcandre.lureau, qemu-devel; +Cc: Stefan Berger
11.09.2023 14:36, marcandre.lureau@redhat.com:
> From: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
>
> Replace select() with poll() to fix a crash when QEMU has a large number
> of FDs.
>
> Fixes:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2020133
>
> Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
> ---
> backends/tpm/tpm_util.c | 12 +++---------
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/backends/tpm/tpm_util.c b/backends/tpm/tpm_util.c
> index a6e6d3e72f..5f4c9f5b6f 100644
> --- a/backends/tpm/tpm_util.c
> +++ b/backends/tpm/tpm_util.c
> @@ -112,12 +112,9 @@ static int tpm_util_request(int fd,
> void *response,
> size_t responselen)
> {
> - fd_set readfds;
> + GPollFD fds[1] = { {.fd = fd, .events = G_IO_IN } };
> int n;
> - struct timeval tv = {
> - .tv_sec = 1,
> - .tv_usec = 0,
> - };
> + int timeout = 1000;
You don't need a variable for this in poll().
Besides, this is clear in the context of this patch, which
says tv_sec=1. Without this context, it becomes suspicious
and catches an eye: too long timeout?
> n = write(fd, request, requestlen);
> if (n < 0) {
> @@ -127,11 +124,8 @@ static int tpm_util_request(int fd,
> return -EFAULT;
> }
>
> - FD_ZERO(&readfds);
> - FD_SET(fd, &readfds);
> -
> /* wait for a second */
> - n = select(fd + 1, &readfds, NULL, NULL, &tv);
> + n = RETRY_ON_EINTR(g_poll(fds, 1, timeout));
It's much better IMHO to use "1000" directly here, esp. since the
comment says about a second.
> if (n != 1) {
> return -errno;
> }
Other than that,
Reviewed-by: Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>
/mjt
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] tpm: fix crash when FD >= 1024
2023-09-11 11:36 [PATCH] tpm: fix crash when FD >= 1024 marcandre.lureau
2023-09-11 11:45 ` Michael Tokarev
@ 2023-09-11 12:56 ` Stefan Berger
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Berger @ 2023-09-11 12:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: marcandre.lureau, qemu-devel; +Cc: Stefan Berger
On 9/11/23 07:36, marcandre.lureau@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Marc-Andr Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
>
> Replace select() with poll() to fix a crash when QEMU has a large number
> of FDs.
>
> Fixes:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2020133
The description there seems wrong. It's a limit of the POSIX API not the
vTPM device driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marc-Andr Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> backends/tpm/tpm_util.c | 12 +++---------
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/backends/tpm/tpm_util.c b/backends/tpm/tpm_util.c
> index a6e6d3e72f..5f4c9f5b6f 100644
> --- a/backends/tpm/tpm_util.c
> +++ b/backends/tpm/tpm_util.c
> @@ -112,12 +112,9 @@ static int tpm_util_request(int fd,
> void *response,
> size_t responselen)
> {
> - fd_set readfds;
> + GPollFD fds[1] = { {.fd = fd, .events = G_IO_IN } };
> int n;
> - struct timeval tv = {
> - .tv_sec = 1,
> - .tv_usec = 0,
> - };
> + int timeout = 1000;
>
> n = write(fd, request, requestlen);
> if (n < 0) {
> @@ -127,11 +124,8 @@ static int tpm_util_request(int fd,
> return -EFAULT;
> }
>
> - FD_ZERO(&readfds);
> - FD_SET(fd, &readfds);
> -
> /* wait for a second */
> - n = select(fd + 1, &readfds, NULL, NULL, &tv);
> + n = RETRY_ON_EINTR(g_poll(fds, 1, timeout));
> if (n != 1) {
> return -errno;
> }
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-09-11 12:57 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-09-11 11:36 [PATCH] tpm: fix crash when FD >= 1024 marcandre.lureau
2023-09-11 11:45 ` Michael Tokarev
2023-09-11 12:56 ` Stefan Berger
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).