2023-05-04 14:23:10

by Dragos Tatulea

Subject: [PATCH] virtio-vdpa: Fix unchecked call to NULL set_vq_affinity

The referenced patch calls set_vq_affinity without checking if the op is
valid. This patch adds the check.

Fixes: 3dad56823b53 ("virtio-vdpa: Support interrupt affinity spreading mechanism")
Reviewed-by: Gal Pressman <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Dragos Tatulea <[email protected]>
---
drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
index eb6aee8c06b2..989e2d7184ce 100644
--- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
+++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
@@ -385,7 +385,9 @@ static int virtio_vdpa_find_vqs(struct virtio_device *vdev, unsigned int nvqs,
err = PTR_ERR(vqs[i]);
goto err_setup_vq;
}
- ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
+
+ if (ops->set_vq_affinity)
+ ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
}

cb.callback = virtio_vdpa_config_cb;
--
2.40.1

2023-05-04 17:26:21

by Feng Liu

Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio-vdpa: Fix unchecked call to NULL set_vq_affinity

On 2023-05-04 a.m.9:50, Dragos Tatulea wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> The referenced patch calls set_vq_affinity without checking if the op is
> valid. This patch adds the check.
>
> Fixes: 3dad56823b53 ("virtio-vdpa: Support interrupt affinity spreading mechanism")
> Reviewed-by: Gal Pressman <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Dragos Tatulea <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> index eb6aee8c06b2..989e2d7184ce 100644
> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> @@ -385,7 +385,9 @@ static int virtio_vdpa_find_vqs(struct virtio_device *vdev, unsigned int nvqs,
> err = PTR_ERR(vqs[i]);
> goto err_setup_vq;
> }
> - ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
> +
> + if (ops->set_vq_affinity)
> + ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
if ops->set_vq_affinity is NULL, should give an error code to err, and
return err

> }
>
> cb.callback = virtio_vdpa_config_cb;
> --
> 2.40.1
>

2023-05-04 17:36:34

by Dragos Tatulea

Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio-vdpa: Fix unchecked call to NULL set_vq_affinity

On Thu, 2023-05-04 at 13:08 -0400, Feng Liu wrote:
>
>
> On 2023-05-04 a.m.9:50, Dragos Tatulea wrote:
> > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> >
> >
> > The referenced patch calls set_vq_affinity without checking if the op is
> > valid. This patch adds the check.
> >
> > Fixes: 3dad56823b53 ("virtio-vdpa: Support interrupt affinity spreading
> > mechanism")
> > Reviewed-by: Gal Pressman <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Dragos Tatulea <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >   drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c | 4 +++-
> >   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> > index eb6aee8c06b2..989e2d7184ce 100644
> > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> > @@ -385,7 +385,9 @@ static int virtio_vdpa_find_vqs(struct virtio_device
> > *vdev, unsigned int nvqs,
> >                          err = PTR_ERR(vqs[i]);
> >                          goto err_setup_vq;
> >                  }
> > -               ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
> > +
> > +               if (ops->set_vq_affinity)
> > +                       ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
> if ops->set_vq_affinity is NULL, should give an error code to err, and
> return err
>
I don't think so: the set_vq_affinity is marked as optional.

> >          }
> >
> >          cb.callback = virtio_vdpa_config_cb;
> > --
> > 2.40.1
> >

2023-05-04 18:19:09

by Feng Liu

Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio-vdpa: Fix unchecked call to NULL set_vq_affinity

On 2023-05-04 p.m.1:19, Dragos Tatulea wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-05-04 at 13:08 -0400, Feng Liu wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2023-05-04 a.m.9:50, Dragos Tatulea wrote:
>>> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>>>
>>>
>>> The referenced patch calls set_vq_affinity without checking if the op is
>>> valid. This patch adds the check.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 3dad56823b53 ("virtio-vdpa: Support interrupt affinity spreading
>>> mechanism")
>>> Reviewed-by: Gal Pressman <[email protected]>
>>> Signed-off-by: Dragos Tatulea <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c | 4 +++-
>>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
>>> index eb6aee8c06b2..989e2d7184ce 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
>>> @@ -385,7 +385,9 @@ static int virtio_vdpa_find_vqs(struct virtio_device
>>> *vdev, unsigned int nvqs,
>>>                          err = PTR_ERR(vqs[i]);
>>>                          goto err_setup_vq;
>>>                  }
>>> -               ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
>>> +
>>> +               if (ops->set_vq_affinity)
>>> +                       ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
>> if ops->set_vq_affinity is NULL, should give an error code to err, and
>> return err
>>
> I don't think so: the set_vq_affinity is marked as optional.
>
Yes, I see
>>>          }
>>>
>>>          cb.callback = virtio_vdpa_config_cb;
>>> --
>>> 2.40.1
>>>
>
>

2023-05-04 18:20:33

by Feng Liu

Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio-vdpa: Fix unchecked call to NULL set_vq_affinity

On 2023-05-04 a.m.9:50, Dragos Tatulea wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> The referenced patch calls set_vq_affinity without checking if the op is
> valid. This patch adds the check.
>
> Fixes: 3dad56823b53 ("virtio-vdpa: Support interrupt affinity spreading mechanism")
> Reviewed-by: Gal Pressman <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Dragos Tatulea <[email protected]>
> ---
Reviewed-by: Feng Liu <[email protected]>

> drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> index eb6aee8c06b2..989e2d7184ce 100644
> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> @@ -385,7 +385,9 @@ static int virtio_vdpa_find_vqs(struct virtio_device *vdev, unsigned int nvqs,
> err = PTR_ERR(vqs[i]);
> goto err_setup_vq;
> }
> - ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
> +
> + if (ops->set_vq_affinity)
> + ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
> }
>
> cb.callback = virtio_vdpa_config_cb;
> --
> 2.40.1
>

2023-05-04 19:03:15

by Michael S. Tsirkin

Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio-vdpa: Fix unchecked call to NULL set_vq_affinity

On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 01:08:54PM -0400, Feng Liu wrote:
>
>
> On 2023-05-04 a.m.9:50, Dragos Tatulea wrote:
> > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> >
> >
> > The referenced patch calls set_vq_affinity without checking if the op is
> > valid. This patch adds the check.
> >
> > Fixes: 3dad56823b53 ("virtio-vdpa: Support interrupt affinity spreading mechanism")
> > Reviewed-by: Gal Pressman <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Dragos Tatulea <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c | 4 +++-
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> > index eb6aee8c06b2..989e2d7184ce 100644
> > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> > @@ -385,7 +385,9 @@ static int virtio_vdpa_find_vqs(struct virtio_device *vdev, unsigned int nvqs,
> > err = PTR_ERR(vqs[i]);
> > goto err_setup_vq;
> > }
> > - ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
> > +
> > + if (ops->set_vq_affinity)
> > + ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
> if ops->set_vq_affinity is NULL, should give an error code to err, and
> return err

Given we ignore return code, hardly seems like a critical thing to do.
Is it really important? affinity is an optimization isn't it?

> > }
> >
> > cb.callback = virtio_vdpa_config_cb;
> > --
> > 2.40.1
> >

2023-05-04 22:56:09

by Feng Liu

Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio-vdpa: Fix unchecked call to NULL set_vq_affinity

On 2023-05-04 p.m.2:51, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 01:08:54PM -0400, Feng Liu wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2023-05-04 a.m.9:50, Dragos Tatulea wrote:
>>> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>>>
>>>
>>> The referenced patch calls set_vq_affinity without checking if the op is
>>> valid. This patch adds the check.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 3dad56823b53 ("virtio-vdpa: Support interrupt affinity spreading mechanism")
>>> Reviewed-by: Gal Pressman <[email protected]>
>>> Signed-off-by: Dragos Tatulea <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c | 4 +++-
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
>>> index eb6aee8c06b2..989e2d7184ce 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
>>> @@ -385,7 +385,9 @@ static int virtio_vdpa_find_vqs(struct virtio_device *vdev, unsigned int nvqs,
>>> err = PTR_ERR(vqs[i]);
>>> goto err_setup_vq;
>>> }
>>> - ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
>>> +
>>> + if (ops->set_vq_affinity)
>>> + ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
>> if ops->set_vq_affinity is NULL, should give an error code to err, and
>> return err
>
> Given we ignore return code, hardly seems like a critical thing to do.
> Is it really important? affinity is an optimization isn't it?
>
Yes, it is an optimization, got it.

>>> }
>>>
>>> cb.callback = virtio_vdpa_config_cb;
>>> --
>>> 2.40.1
>>>
>

2023-05-12 13:08:48

by Dragos Tatulea

Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio-vdpa: Fix unchecked call to NULL set_vq_affinity

On Thu, 2023-05-04 at 14:51 -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 01:08:54PM -0400, Feng Liu wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2023-05-04 a.m.9:50, Dragos Tatulea wrote:
> > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> > >
> > >
> > > The referenced patch calls set_vq_affinity without checking if the op is
> > > valid. This patch adds the check.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 3dad56823b53 ("virtio-vdpa: Support interrupt affinity spreading
> > > mechanism")
> > > Reviewed-by: Gal Pressman <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Dragos Tatulea <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > >   drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c | 4 +++-
> > >   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> > > index eb6aee8c06b2..989e2d7184ce 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> > > @@ -385,7 +385,9 @@ static int virtio_vdpa_find_vqs(struct virtio_device
> > > *vdev, unsigned int nvqs,
> > >                          err = PTR_ERR(vqs[i]);
> > >                          goto err_setup_vq;
> > >                  }
> > > -               ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
> > > +
> > > +               if (ops->set_vq_affinity)
> > > +                       ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
> > if ops->set_vq_affinity is NULL, should give an error code to err, and
> > return err
>
> Given we ignore return code, hardly seems like a critical thing to do.
> Is it really important? affinity is an optimization isn't it?
>
> > >
set_vq_affinity is optional so it's not an error if the op is not implemented.

Is there anything else that needs to be done for this fix?

Thanks,
Dragos

2023-05-12 13:57:18

by Michael S. Tsirkin

Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio-vdpa: Fix unchecked call to NULL set_vq_affinity

On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 12:51:21PM +0000, Dragos Tatulea wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-05-04 at 14:51 -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 01:08:54PM -0400, Feng Liu wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2023-05-04 a.m.9:50, Dragos Tatulea wrote:
> > > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The referenced patch calls set_vq_affinity without checking if the op is
> > > > valid. This patch adds the check.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: 3dad56823b53 ("virtio-vdpa: Support interrupt affinity spreading
> > > > mechanism")
> > > > Reviewed-by: Gal Pressman <[email protected]>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Dragos Tatulea <[email protected]>
> > > > ---
> > > > ? drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c | 4 +++-
> > > > ? 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> > > > index eb6aee8c06b2..989e2d7184ce 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> > > > @@ -385,7 +385,9 @@ static int virtio_vdpa_find_vqs(struct virtio_device
> > > > *vdev, unsigned int nvqs,
> > > > ???????????????????????? err = PTR_ERR(vqs[i]);
> > > > ???????????????????????? goto err_setup_vq;
> > > > ???????????????? }
> > > > -?????????????? ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
> > > > +
> > > > +?????????????? if (ops->set_vq_affinity)
> > > > +?????????????????????? ops->set_vq_affinity(vdpa, i, &masks[i]);
> > > if ops->set_vq_affinity is NULL, should give an error code to err, and
> > > return err
> >
> > Given we ignore return code, hardly seems like a critical thing to do.
> > Is it really important? affinity is an optimization isn't it?
> >
> > > >
> set_vq_affinity is optional so it's not an error if the op is not implemented.
>
> Is there anything else that needs to be done for this fix?
>
> Thanks,
> Dragos
>

no, it's queued already.