From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@kernel.org>,
xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] xen/blkback: Check for insane amounts of request on the ring.
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 10:42:32 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130128154231.GF4838@konrad-lan.dumpdata.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51066A1202000078000BA020@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 11:07:46AM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 25.01.13 at 19:43, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:
> > @@ -764,6 +768,9 @@ __do_block_io_op(struct xen_blkif *blkif)
> > rp = blk_rings->common.sring->req_prod;
> > rmb(); /* Ensure we see queued requests up to 'rp'. */
> >
> > + if (RING_REQUEST_PROD_OVERFLOW(&blk_rings->common, rp, rc))
> > + return -EACCES;
>
> Actually I wonder whether we need the new macro at all: It seems
> to me that using RING_REQUEST_CONS_OVERFLOW(&blk_rings->common, rp)
> here would achieve the same effect.
But it would not. The RING_REQUEST_CONS_OVERFLOW only check that the
non-shared ring entries (rsp_prod and rsp_prod_pvt) are less than
the size of the ring (32). In other words - they check whether we want
to process more requests as we still have a back-log of responses to
deal with.
This new macro would check for the req_prod being bogus and out of
bounds. Bounds being the difference between rsp_prod and req_prod
being bigger than ring (32).
>
> Jan
>
> > +
> > while (rc != rp) {
> >
> > if (RING_REQUEST_CONS_OVERFLOW(&blk_rings->common, rc))
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-28 15:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1359135152-30688-1-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2013-01-25 17:32 ` [PATCH 1/3] xen/blkback: Don't trust the handle from the frontend Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-01-28 11:09 ` [Xen-devel] " Jan Beulich
2013-01-25 17:32 ` [PATCH 2/3] xen/ring: Add a new macro to detect whether there is an overflow in requests and response Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-01-25 17:45 ` [Xen-devel] " Roger Pau Monné
2013-01-25 18:29 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-01-25 18:41 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-01-25 18:41 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-01-25 17:32 ` [PATCH 3/3] xen/blkback: Check for insane amounts of request on the ring Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-01-25 18:43 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-01-28 11:07 ` [Xen-devel] " Jan Beulich
2013-01-28 15:42 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk [this message]
2013-01-28 16:18 ` Jan Beulich
2013-01-28 16:47 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-01-28 11:38 ` David Vrabel
2013-01-28 15:44 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-01-28 16:03 ` David Vrabel
2013-01-28 16:13 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
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=20130128154231.GF4838@konrad-lan.dumpdata.com \
--to=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=konrad@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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).