[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v6 29/42] nvme: refactor request bounds checking
From: |
Maxim Levitsky |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v6 29/42] nvme: refactor request bounds checking |
Date: |
Wed, 25 Mar 2020 12:56:49 +0200 |
On Mon, 2020-03-16 at 07:29 -0700, Klaus Jensen wrote:
> From: Klaus Jensen <address@hidden>
>
> Signed-off-by: Klaus Jensen <address@hidden>
> ---
> hw/block/nvme.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/block/nvme.c b/hw/block/nvme.c
> index eecfad694bf8..ba520c76bae5 100644
> --- a/hw/block/nvme.c
> +++ b/hw/block/nvme.c
> @@ -491,6 +491,20 @@ static void nvme_clear_events(NvmeCtrl *n, uint8_t
> event_type)
> }
> }
>
> +static inline uint16_t nvme_check_bounds(NvmeCtrl *n, NvmeNamespace *ns,
> + uint64_t slba, uint32_t nlb,
> + NvmeRequest *req)
> +{
> + uint64_t nsze = le64_to_cpu(ns->id_ns.nsze);
> +
> + if (unlikely(UINT64_MAX - slba < nlb || slba + nlb > nsze)) {
> + trace_nvme_dev_err_invalid_lba_range(slba, nlb, nsze);
> + return NVME_LBA_RANGE | NVME_DNR;
> + }
> +
> + return NVME_SUCCESS;
> +}
Looks good.
> +
> static void nvme_rw_cb(void *opaque, int ret)
> {
> NvmeRequest *req = opaque;
> @@ -536,10 +550,11 @@ static uint16_t nvme_write_zeros(NvmeCtrl *n,
> NvmeNamespace *ns, NvmeCmd *cmd,
> uint32_t nlb = le16_to_cpu(rw->nlb) + 1;
> uint64_t offset = slba << data_shift;
> uint32_t count = nlb << data_shift;
> + uint16_t status;
>
> - if (unlikely(slba + nlb > ns->id_ns.nsze)) {
> - trace_nvme_dev_err_invalid_lba_range(slba, nlb, ns->id_ns.nsze);
> - return NVME_LBA_RANGE | NVME_DNR;
> + status = nvme_check_bounds(n, ns, slba, nlb, req);
> + if (status) {
> + return status;
> }
>
> block_acct_start(blk_get_stats(n->conf.blk), &req->acct, 0,
> @@ -562,13 +577,14 @@ static uint16_t nvme_rw(NvmeCtrl *n, NvmeNamespace *ns,
> NvmeCmd *cmd,
> uint64_t data_offset = slba << data_shift;
> int is_write = rw->opcode == NVME_CMD_WRITE ? 1 : 0;
> enum BlockAcctType acct = is_write ? BLOCK_ACCT_WRITE : BLOCK_ACCT_READ;
> + uint16_t status;
>
> trace_nvme_dev_rw(is_write ? "write" : "read", nlb, data_size, slba);
>
> - if (unlikely((slba + nlb) > ns->id_ns.nsze)) {
> + status = nvme_check_bounds(n, ns, slba, nlb, req);
> + if (status) {
> block_acct_invalid(blk_get_stats(n->conf.blk), acct);
> - trace_nvme_dev_err_invalid_lba_range(slba, nlb, ns->id_ns.nsze);
> - return NVME_LBA_RANGE | NVME_DNR;
> + return status;
> }
>
> if (nvme_map(n, cmd, &req->qsg, &req->iov, data_size, req)) {
Looks good as well, once we get support for discard, it will
use this as well, but for now indeed only write zeros and read/write
need bounds checking on the IO path.
Reviewed-by: Maxim Levitsky <address@hidden>
Best regards,
Maxim Levitsky
[PATCH v6 29/42] nvme: refactor request bounds checking, Klaus Jensen, 2020/03/16
- Re: [PATCH v6 29/42] nvme: refactor request bounds checking,
Maxim Levitsky <=
[PATCH v6 27/42] nvme: add request mapping helper, Klaus Jensen, 2020/03/16
[PATCH v6 28/42] nvme: verify validity of prp lists in the cmb, Klaus Jensen, 2020/03/16
[PATCH v6 34/42] pci: pass along the return value of dma_memory_rw, Klaus Jensen, 2020/03/16
[PATCH v6 30/42] nvme: add check for mdts, Klaus Jensen, 2020/03/16
[PATCH v6 26/42] nvme: pass request along for tracing, Klaus Jensen, 2020/03/16