[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v2] net/e1000e_core: adjust count if RDH exceeds RDT in e1000

From: Mauro Matteo Cascella
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net/e1000e_core: adjust count if RDH exceeds RDT in e1000e_ring_advance()
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:53:13 +0100

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 4:56 AM Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 2020/11/13 下午6:31, Mauro Matteo Cascella wrote:
> > The e1000e_write_packet_to_guest() function iterates over a set of
> > receive descriptors by advancing rx descriptor head register (RDH) from
> > its initial value to rx descriptor tail register (RDT). The check in
> > e1000e_ring_empty() is responsible for detecting whether RDH has reached
> > RDT, terminating the loop if that's the case. Additional checks have
> > been added in the past to deal with bogus values submitted by the guest
> > to prevent possible infinite loop. This is done by "wrapping around" RDH
> > at some point and detecting whether it assumes the original value during
> > the loop.
> >
> > However, when e1000e is configured to use the packet split feature, RDH is
> > incremented by two instead of one, as the packet split descriptors are
> > 32 bytes while regular descriptors are 16 bytes. A malicious or buggy
> > guest may set RDT to an odd value and transmit only null RX descriptors.
> > This corner case would prevent RDH from ever matching RDT, leading to an
> > infinite loop. This patch adds a check in e1000e_ring_advance() to make sure
> > RDH does not exceed RDT in a single incremental step, adjusting the count
> > value accordingly.
> Can this patch solve this issue in another way?
> 20201111130636.2208620-1-ppandit@redhat.com/">https://patchew.org/QEMU/20201111130636.2208620-1-ppandit@redhat.com/
> Thanks

Yes, it does work nicely. Still, I think this patch is useful to avoid
possible inconsistent state in e1000e_ring_advance() when count > 1.

Thank you,
Mauro Matteo Cascella
Red Hat Product Security
PGP-Key ID: BB3410B0

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]