Am 06.07.26 um 14:24 schrieb Dragos Tatulea:
On 06.07.26 12:13, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
Am 06.07.26 um 12:01 schrieb Christian Borntraeger:
We have seen in our CI the following KASAN message:
BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in cmd_exec+0x550/0xca0 [mlx5_core]
Read of size 272 at addr 0000000176795020 by task qemu-system-s39/82764
[...]
[<000011388ab3a7a0>] cmd_exec+0x550/0xca0 [mlx5_core]
[<000011388ab3b61c>] mlx5_cmd_exec_cb+0x25c/0x4f0 [mlx5_core]
[<000011388b21e82e>] mlx5_vdpa_exec_async_cmds+0x22e/0x5e0 [mlx5_vdpa]
[<000011388b21fd44>] create_direct_keys+0x954/0xef0 [mlx5_vdpa]
[...]
The buggy address is located 4128 bytes inside of
allocated 4384-byte region [0000000176794000, 0000000176795120)
So in essence we read 16 bytes beyond 4384-byte allocation.
create_direct_keys calculates the pointer and length for in and out
buffers.
The size calculation for in includes the entire structure
size (out + in + mtt[]) but the pointer passed to cmd_exec points only
to the 'in' field, skipping the 'out' field.
This causes mlx5_copy_to_msg() to read beyond the allocated buffer
by sizeof(out) bytes when copying command data.
Calculates the input size as sizeof(in) + mtt_array_size to match the
pointer and allocation size.
Fixes: 0071b138d44a ("vdpa/mlx5: Create direct MKEYs in parallel")
Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <[email protected]>
---
drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mr.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mr.c b/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mr.c
index 6d02ccf9eb91..03fe7f5ca412 100644
--- a/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mr.c
+++ b/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mr.c
@@ -233,7 +233,7 @@ static int create_direct_keys(struct mlx5_vdpa_dev *mvdev,
struct mlx5_vdpa_mr *
cmds[i].out = cmd_mem->out;
cmds[i].outlen = sizeof(cmd_mem->out);
cmds[i].in = cmd_mem->in;
- cmds[i].inlen = struct_size(cmd_mem, mtt, mttcount);
+ cmds[i].inlen = sizeof(cmd_mem->in) + (mttcount *
sizeof(cmd_mem->mtt[0]));
Woops... Thanks for the catch. The fix is good.
Assuming the fix is the correct fix, question is, if I should use the offset of
in instead, e.g.
cmds[i].inlen = struct_size(cmd_mem, mtt, mttcount) -
offsetof(cmd_mem, in);
to handle potential alignment and padding aspects.
Seems harder to read. Why not:
sizeof(cmd_mem->in) + flex_array_size(cmd_mem, mtts, mttcount) ?
Can do that. I assume we do not have any implicit holes in the structure due to
alignment? In
other words, sizeof(cmd_mem->in) can never be something like 20 (and then the
flex array would
start at 24 to align 8 byte elements). If thats the case I will respin with
your proposal.
