DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
To: "Min Hu (Connor)" <humin29@huawei.com>, Gaëtan Rivet <grive@u256.net>
Cc: chas3@att.com, declan.doherty@intel.com, dev@dpdk.org,
	gowrishankar.m@linux.vnet.ibm.com, stable@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] [v1, 2/2] bonding: fix PCI address comparison on non-pci ports
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 10:53:07 +0000
Message-ID: <427ad29b-a9cc-3a62-80da-0606b218dbe4@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <447435c6-e04f-ab63-695b-8d46827a141b@huawei.com>

On 12/16/2020 12:14 PM, Min Hu (Connor) wrote:
> Hi,
>      sorry for late reply.
>      I know what you mean. But "find_port_id_by_pci_addr"
> is one static type funtion. it is only used in the function
> "parse_port_id". what you modified in "find_port_id_by_pci_addr"
> is totally done before "find_port_id_by_pci_addr" in the function
> "parse_port_id". That is, it first find pci_bus, then find
> rte_pci_device, at last get port id.
> So the bug you described will not happen in current version,
> unless others directly use the function "find_port_id_by_pci_addr"
> without considering that rte_eth_devices[] may contain non-pci devices.
> So, I think the patch is OK to me.
> Acked-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>

Applied to dpdk-next-net/main, thanks.

> 在 2020/12/7 22:07, Gaëtan Rivet 写道:
>> On 26/11/20 10:24 +0800, Min Hu (Connor) wrote:
>>> what scenarios may cause bugs in old ways.
>>> Could you give an example, thanks.
>> Hello,
>> For example in the following code:
>> -       RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV(i) {
>> -               pci_dev = RTE_ETH_DEV_TO_PCI(&rte_eth_devices[i]);
>> -               eth_pci_addr = &pci_dev->addr;
>> All ethdev are iterated, before reading their supposed PCI addresses, and
>> comparing those to the one passed in arguments.
>> But not all ethdev will be PCI devices, so the cast is incorrect. It will do
>> a containerof() on a structure that it supposes contains an rte_device at the
>> offset 16 (two pointers accounting for the TAILQ_ENTRY()), but nothing 
>> prevents any
>> other bus from implementing their device with any other layout.
>> So the cast is wrong, but generally it will give out readable memory at least.
>> Then the field ((eth_dev)->device)->addr will be read and compared against the 
>> input,
>> with arbitrary data here.
>> A scenario that could cause bug would be when another bus implements a device
>> in such a way that it will write plausible binary rep of PCI addresses at the
>> same offset, and match a request from a user. The bonding PMD would take the
>> device over without properly checking that it is actually a PCI device.
>> There have been APIs introduced in the EAL to simplify the iteration of
>> devices, especially restricted to buses. Those APIs should be used instead.
>> The current implementation is inefficient and wrong. It will work in most cases
>> but can still trigger weird issues for users, especially in cases that bonding
>> PMD devs won't generally encounter (with setups where multiple buses are used
>> with a variety of devices).
>> Regards,

      reply	other threads:[~2020-12-17 10:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-04-17 16:42 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 0/2] bonding: fix port id check and PCI addr cmp Gaetan Rivet
2020-04-17 16:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 1/2] bonding: fix port id validity check on parsing Gaetan Rivet
2020-11-26  2:45   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1, " Min Hu (Connor)
2020-12-07 13:34     ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-04-17 16:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 2/2] bonding: fix PCI address comparison on non-pci ports Gaetan Rivet
2020-11-26  2:24   ` [dpdk-dev] [v1, " Min Hu (Connor)
2020-12-07 14:07     ` Gaëtan Rivet
2020-12-16 12:14       ` Min Hu (Connor)
2020-12-17 10:53         ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=427ad29b-a9cc-3a62-80da-0606b218dbe4@intel.com \
    --to=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=chas3@att.com \
    --cc=declan.doherty@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=gowrishankar.m@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=grive@u256.net \
    --cc=humin29@huawei.com \
    --cc=stable@dpdk.org \


* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

DPDK patches and discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
	public-inbox-index dev

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:

AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git