S Si-Wei Liu #
Message details and related content
On 12/21/2021 9:55 PM, Eli Cohen wrote:
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 05:55:56PM -0800, Si-Wei Liu wrote:quoted
On 12/21/2021 9:19 AM, Eli Cohen wrote:quoted
Avoid reading device configuration during feature negotiation. Read device status and verify that VIRTIO_CONFIG_S_FEATURES_OK is set. Otherwise, return -EAGAIN. Signed-off-by: Eli Cohen <redacted> --- drivers/vdpa/vdpa.c | 10 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/vdpa.c b/drivers/vdpa/vdpa.c index 5134c83c4a22..3285cebd89c0 100644 --- a/drivers/vdpa/vdpa.c +++ b/drivers/vdpa/vdpa.c@@ -838,8 +838,18 @@ vdpa_dev_config_fill(struct vdpa_device *vdev, struct sk_buff *msg, u32 portid, { u32 device_id; void *hdr; + u8 status; int err; + mutex_lock(&vdev->cf_mutex); + status = vdev->config->get_status(vdev);Atomicity and data consistency not guaranteed against vdpa_get_config and get_features in vdpa_dev_net_config_fill(). Need to use coarse locking.Your concern is that vdpa_get_config() is vdpa_dev_net_config_fill () is not being read under the lock?
Not exactly. vdpa_get_config() is already in the cf_mutex lock. However, the config data may become invalid getting out of the FEATURES_OK check, as theoretically it's possible the guest could change the config via set_config(), set_status(), or reset() in between. You'd need to use a single cf_mutex to protect almost the whole code block in vdpa_dev_config_fill() to ensure data consistency. -Siwei
I will put it under the lock.quoted
-Siweiquoted
+ if (!(status & VIRTIO_CONFIG_S_FEATURES_OK)) { + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Features negotiation not completed"); + mutex_unlock(&vdev->cf_mutex); + return -EAGAIN; + } + mutex_unlock(&vdev->cf_mutex); + hdr = genlmsg_put(msg, portid, seq, &vdpa_nl_family, flags, VDPA_CMD_DEV_CONFIG_GET); if (!hdr)
_______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization