Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 1/1] xen/blkback: rework connect_ring() to avoid inconsistent xenstore 'ring-page-order' set by malicious blkfront
From: Dongli Zhang <hidden>
Date: 2018-12-18 15:29:35
Also in:
lkml
On 12/18/2018 11:13 PM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 07:31:59PM +0800, Dongli Zhang wrote:quoted
Hi Roger, On 12/18/2018 05:33 PM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:quoted
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 08:55:38AM +0800, Dongli Zhang wrote:quoted
The xenstore 'ring-page-order' is used globally for each blkback queue and therefore should be read from xenstore only once. However, it is obtained in read_per_ring_refs() which might be called multiple times during the initialization of each blkback queue. If the blkfront is malicious and the 'ring-page-order' is set in different value by blkfront every time before blkback reads it, this may end up at the "WARN_ON(i != (XEN_BLKIF_REQS_PER_PAGE * blkif->nr_ring_pages));" in xen_blkif_disconnect() when frontend is destroyed. This patch reworks connect_ring() to read xenstore 'ring-page-order' only once. Signed-off-by: Dongli Zhang <redacted> --- Changed since v1: * change the order of xenstore read in read_per_ring_refs(suggested by Roger Pau Monne) * use xenbus_read_unsigned() in connect_ring() (suggested by Roger Pau Monne) drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------- 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)diff --git a/drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c b/drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c index a4bc74e..7178f0f 100644 --- a/drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c +++ b/drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c@@ -926,7 +926,7 @@ static int read_per_ring_refs(struct xen_blkif_ring *ring, const char *dir) int err, i, j; struct xen_blkif *blkif = ring->blkif; struct xenbus_device *dev = blkif->be->dev; - unsigned int ring_page_order, nr_grefs, evtchn; + unsigned int nr_grefs, evtchn; err = xenbus_scanf(XBT_NIL, dir, "event-channel", "%u", &evtchn);@@ -936,43 +936,38 @@ static int read_per_ring_refs(struct xen_blkif_ring *ring, const char *dir) return err; } - err = xenbus_scanf(XBT_NIL, dev->otherend, "ring-page-order", "%u", - &ring_page_order); - if (err != 1) { - err = xenbus_scanf(XBT_NIL, dir, "ring-ref", "%u", &ring_ref[0]); - if (err != 1) { + nr_grefs = blkif->nr_ring_pages; + WARN_ON(!nr_grefs); + + for (i = 0; i < nr_grefs; i++) { + char ring_ref_name[RINGREF_NAME_LEN]; + + snprintf(ring_ref_name, RINGREF_NAME_LEN, "ring-ref%u", i); + err = xenbus_scanf(XBT_NIL, dir, ring_ref_name, + "%u", &ring_ref[i]); + + if (err != 1 && (i || (!i && nr_grefs > 1))) {AFAICT the above condition can be simplified as "err != 1 && nr_grefs".quoted
err = -EINVAL;There's no point in setting err here...quoted
- xenbus_dev_fatal(dev, err, "reading %s/ring-ref", dir); + xenbus_dev_fatal(dev, err, "reading %s/%s", + dir, ring_ref_name); return err;...since you can just return -EINVAL (same applies to the other instance below).I would like to confirm if I would keep the err = -EINVAL in below because most of the below code is copied from original implementation without modification. There is no err set by xenbus_read_unsigned().Right, but instead of doing: err = -EINVAL; return err; You can just do: return -EINVAL; Which is one line shorter :).
However, for the "ring-page-order" case, the err used in xenbus_dev_fatal() is not set as xenbus_read_unsigned() does not return any err? For "ring-page-order", I would still need to set err = -EINVAL with extra one line of code?
quoted
+ ring_page_order = xenbus_read_unsigned(dev->otherend, + "ring-page-order", 0); + + if (ring_page_order > xen_blkif_max_ring_order) { + err = -EINVAL; + xenbus_dev_fatal(dev, err, + "requested ring page order %d exceed max:%d", + ring_page_order, + xen_blkif_max_ring_order); + return err; + } + + be->blkif->nr_ring_pages = 1 << ring_page_order; For the rest, I would do something like: + err = xenbus_scanf(XBT_NIL, dir, ring_ref_name, + "%u", &ring_ref[i]); + + if (err != 1 && nr_grefs > 1) { + xenbus_dev_fatal(dev, err, "reading %s/%s", + dir, ring_ref_name); + return -EINVAL; + } Thank you very much!Thanks!
Dongli Zhang