Re: [PATCH v2] xen-blkback: fix compatibility bug with single page rings
From: Dongli Zhang <hidden>
Date: 2021-01-30 09:00:55
Also in:
lkml, xen-devel
On 1/29/21 12:13 AM, Paul Durrant wrote:
quoted
-----Original Message----- From: Jürgen Groß <jgross@suse.com> Sent: 29 January 2021 07:35 To: Dongli Zhang <redacted>; Paul Durrant <paul@xen.org>; xen- devel@lists.xenproject.org; linux-block@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Paul Durrant <redacted>; Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <redacted>; Roger Pau Monné [off-list ref]; Jens Axboe [off-list ref] Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] xen-blkback: fix compatibility bug with single page rings On 29.01.21 07:20, Dongli Zhang wrote:quoted
On 1/28/21 5:04 AM, Paul Durrant wrote:quoted
From: Paul Durrant <redacted> Prior to commit 4a8c31a1c6f5 ("xen/blkback: rework connect_ring() to avoid inconsistent xenstore 'ring-page-order' set by malicious blkfront"), the behaviour of xen-blkback when connecting to a frontend was: - read 'ring-page-order' - if not present then expect a single page ring specified by 'ring-ref' - else expect a ring specified by 'ring-refX' where X is between 0 and 1 << ring-page-order This was correct behaviour, but was broken by the afforementioned commit to become: - read 'ring-page-order' - if not present then expect a single page ring (i.e. ring-page-order = 0) - expect a ring specified by 'ring-refX' where X is between 0 and 1 << ring-page-order - if that didn't work then see if there's a single page ring specified by 'ring-ref' This incorrect behaviour works most of the time but fails when a frontend that sets 'ring-page-order' is unloaded and replaced by one that does not because, instead of reading 'ring-ref', xen-blkback will read the stale 'ring-ref0' left around by the previous frontend will try to map the wrong grant reference. This patch restores the original behaviour. Fixes: 4a8c31a1c6f5 ("xen/blkback: rework connect_ring() to avoid inconsistent xenstore 'ring-page-order' set by malicious blkfront")quoted
quoted
Signed-off-by: Paul Durrant <redacted> --- Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <redacted> Cc: "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Cc: Dongli Zhang <redacted> v2: - Remove now-spurious error path special-case when nr_grefs == 1 --- drivers/block/xen-blkback/common.h | 1 + drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c | 38 +++++++++++++----------------- 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)diff --git a/drivers/block/xen-blkback/common.h b/drivers/block/xen-blkback/common.h index b0c71d3a81a0..524a79f10de6 100644 --- a/drivers/block/xen-blkback/common.h +++ b/drivers/block/xen-blkback/common.h@@ -313,6 +313,7 @@ struct xen_blkif { struct work_struct free_work; unsigned int nr_ring_pages; + bool multi_ref;Is it really necessary to introduce 'multi_ref' here or we may just re-use 'nr_ring_pages'? According to blkfront code, 'ring-page-order' is set only when it is not zero, that is, only when (info->nr_ring_pages > 1).That's how it is *supposed* to be. Windows certainly behaves that way too.quoted
Did you look into all other OS's (Windows, OpenBSD, FreebSD, NetBSD, Solaris, Netware, other proprietary systems) implementations to verify that claim? I don't think so. So better safe than sorry.Indeed. It was unfortunate that the commit to blkif.h documenting multi-page (829f2a9c6dfae) was not crystal clear and (possibly as a consequence) blkback was implemented to read ring-ref0 rather than ring-ref if ring-page-order was present and 0. Hence the only safe thing to do is to restore that behaviour.
Thank you very much for the explanation! Reviewed-by: Dongli Zhang <redacted> Dongli ZHang