[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] nbd/server: Prefer heap over stack for parsing client
Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] nbd/server: Prefer heap over stack for parsing client names
Thu, 14 Nov 2019 07:33:29 -0600
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.1
On 11/14/19 4:04 AM, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
On Wed, 2019-11-13 at 20:46 -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
As long as we limit NBD names to 256 bytes (the bare minimum permitted
by the standard), stack-allocation works for parsing a name received
from the client. But as mentioned in a comment, we eventually want to
permit up to the 4k maximum of the NBD standard, which is too large
for stack allocation; so switch everything in the server to use heap
allocation. For now, there is no change in actually supported name
I am just curios, why is this so?
I know that kernel uses 8K stacks due to historical limitation
of 1:1 physical memory mapping which creates fragmentation,
but in the userspace stacks shouldn't really be limited and grow on demand.
Actually, 4k rather than 8k stack overflow guard pages are typical on
some OS. The problem with stack-allocating anything larger than the
guard page size is that you can end up overshooting the guard page, and
then the OS is unable to catch stack overflow in the normal manner of
sending SIGSEGV. Also, when using coroutines, it is very common to have
limited stack size in the first place, where large stack allocations can
run into issues. So in general, it's a good rule of thumb to never
stack-allocate something if it can be larger than 4k.
Some gcc security option limits this?
Not by default, but you can compile with -Wframe-larger-than=4096 (or
even smaller) to catch instances where stack allocation is likely to run
@@ -427,7 +431,7 @@ static void nbd_check_meta_export(NBDClient *client)
static int nbd_negotiate_handle_export_name(NBDClient *client, bool no_zeroes,
- char name[NBD_MAX_NAME_SIZE + 1];
+ g_autofree char *name;
That is what patchew complained about I think.
Yes, and I've already fixed the missing initializer.
Isn't it wonderful how g_autofree fixes one issue
and introduces another. I mean 'name' isn't really
used here prior to allocation according to plain C,
but due to g_autofree, it can be now on any error
path. Nothing against g_autofree though, just noting this.
Yes, and our documentation for g_auto* reminds that all such variables
with automatic cleanup must have an initializer or be set prior to any
exit path. I think I see why I didn't catch it beforehand - I'm
compiling with --enable-debug, which passes CFLAGS=-g, while the
compiler warning occurs when -O2 is in effect; but it is rather annoying
that gcc doesn't catch the bug when not optimizing.
Looks correct, but I might have missed something.
Reviewed-by: Maxim Levitsky <address@hidden>
Thanks, and assuming that's with my initializer fix squashed in.
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3226
Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org
[PATCH v3 3/4] nbd: Don't send oversize strings, Eric Blake, 2019/11/13