Re: [Xen-devel] Question on xen-netfront code to fix a potential ring buffer corruption

[Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>]

On 18.08.19 10:31, Dongli Zhang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Would you please help confirm why the condition at line 908 is ">="?
>
> In my opinion, we would only hit "skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frag == MAX_SKB_FRAGS" at
> line 908.
>
> 890 static RING_IDX xennet_fill_frags(struct netfront_queue *queue,
> 891                                   struct sk_buff *skb,
> 892                                   struct sk_buff_head *list)
> 893 {
> 894         RING_IDX cons = queue->rx.rsp_cons;
> 895         struct sk_buff *nskb;
> 896
> 897         while ((nskb = __skb_dequeue(list))) {
> 898                 struct xen_netif_rx_response *rx =
> 899                         RING_GET_RESPONSE(&queue->rx, ++cons);
> 900                 skb_frag_t *nfrag = &skb_shinfo(nskb)->frags[0];
> 901
> 902                 if (skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frags == MAX_SKB_FRAGS) {
> 903                         unsigned int pull_to = 
> NETFRONT_SKB_CB(skb)->pull_to;
> 904
> 905                         BUG_ON(pull_to < skb_headlen(skb));
> 906                         __pskb_pull_tail(skb, pull_to - skb_headlen(skb));
> 907                 }
> 908                 if (unlikely(skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frags >= MAX_SKB_FRAGS)) {
> 909                         queue->rx.rsp_cons = ++cons;
> 910                         kfree_skb(nskb);
> 911                         return ~0U;
> 912                 }
> 913
> 914                 skb_add_rx_frag(skb, skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frags,
> 915                                 skb_frag_page(nfrag),
> 916                                 rx->offset, rx->status, PAGE_SIZE);
> 917
> 918                 skb_shinfo(nskb)->nr_frags = 0;
> 919                 kfree_skb(nskb);
> 920         }
> 921
> 922         return cons;
> 923 }
>
>
> The reason that I ask about this is because I am considering below patch to
> avoid a potential xen-netfront ring buffer corruption.
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/xen-netfront.c b/drivers/net/xen-netfront.c
> index 8d33970..48a2162 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/xen-netfront.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/xen-netfront.c
> @@ -906,7 +906,7 @@ static RING_IDX xennet_fill_frags(struct netfront_queue 
> *queue,
>                          __pskb_pull_tail(skb, pull_to - skb_headlen(skb));
>                  }
>                  if (unlikely(skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frags >= MAX_SKB_FRAGS)) {
> -                       queue->rx.rsp_cons = ++cons;
> +                       queue->rx.rsp_cons = cons + skb_queue_len(list) + 1;
>                          kfree_skb(nskb);
>                          return ~0U;
>                  }
>
>
> If there is skb left in list when we return ~0U, queue->rx.rsp_cons may be set
> incorrectly.
Sa basically you want to consume the responses for all outstanding skbs
in the list?

> While I am trying to make up a case that would hit the corruption, I could not
> explain why (unlikely(skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frags >= MAX_SKB_FRAGS)), but not
> just "==". Perhaps __pskb_pull_tail() may fail although pull_to is less than
> skb_headlen(skb).
I don't think nr_frags can be larger than MAX_SKB_FRAGS. OTOH I don't
think it hurts to have a safety net here in order to avoid problems.

Originally this was BUG_ON(skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frags >= MAX_SKB_FRAGS)
so that might explain the ">=".


Juergen

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel