Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 5 Apr 2019 11:36:08 +0200
From:   Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
To:     Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>
Cc:     netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
        "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
        Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/4] vhost/vsock: split packets to send using
 multiple buffers
Message-ID: <20190405093608.f2zsyxnjxcba5v6r@steredhat>
References: <20190404105838.101559-1-sgarzare@redhat.com>
 <20190404105838.101559-3-sgarzare@redhat.com>
 <20190405081356.GC25152@stefanha-x1.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190405081356.GC25152@stefanha-x1.localdomain>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 09:13:56AM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 12:58:36PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> > @@ -139,8 +139,18 @@ vhost_transport_do_send_pkt(struct vhost_vsock *vsock,
> >  			break;
> >  		}
> >  
> > -		len = iov_length(&vq->iov[out], in);
> > -		iov_iter_init(&iov_iter, READ, &vq->iov[out], in, len);
> > +		payload_len = pkt->len - pkt->off;
> > +		iov_len = iov_length(&vq->iov[out], in);
> > +		iov_iter_init(&iov_iter, READ, &vq->iov[out], in, iov_len);
> > +
> > +		/* If the packet is greater than the space available in the
> > +		 * buffer, we split it using multiple buffers.
> > +		 */
> > +		if (payload_len > iov_len - sizeof(pkt->hdr))
> 
> Integer underflow.  iov_len is controlled by the guest and therefore
> untrusted.  Please validate iov_len before assuming it's larger than
> sizeof(pkt->hdr).
> 

Okay, I'll do it!

> > -		vhost_add_used(vq, head, sizeof(pkt->hdr) + pkt->len);
> > +		vhost_add_used(vq, head, sizeof(pkt->hdr) + payload_len);
> >  		added = true;
> >  
> > +		pkt->off += payload_len;
> > +
> > +		/* If we didn't send all the payload we can requeue the packet
> > +		 * to send it with the next available buffer.
> > +		 */
> > +		if (pkt->off < pkt->len) {
> > +			spin_lock_bh(&vsock->send_pkt_list_lock);
> > +			list_add(&pkt->list, &vsock->send_pkt_list);
> > +			spin_unlock_bh(&vsock->send_pkt_list_lock);
> > +			continue;
> 
> The virtio_transport_deliver_tap_pkt() call is skipped.  Packet capture
> should see the exact packets that are delivered.  I think this patch
> will present one large packet instead of several smaller packets that
> were actually delivered.

I'll modify virtio_transport_build_skb() to take care of pkt->off
and reading the payload size from the virtio_vsock_hdr.
Otherwise, should I introduce another field in virtio_vsock_pkt to store
the payload size?

Thanks,
Stefano