qemu-stable
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] pcie_sriov: Validate NumVFs


From: Akihiko Odaki
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] pcie_sriov: Validate NumVFs
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 17:13:42 +0900
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird

On 2024/02/19 2:36, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 01:56:07PM +0900, Akihiko Odaki wrote:
The guest may write NumVFs greater than TotalVFs and that can lead
to buffer overflow in VF implementations.

Cc: qemu-stable@nongnu.org
Fixes: 7c0fa8dff811 ("pcie: Add support for Single Root I/O Virtualization 
(SR/IOV)")
Signed-off-by: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@daynix.com>
---
  hw/pci/pcie_sriov.c | 3 +++
  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/hw/pci/pcie_sriov.c b/hw/pci/pcie_sriov.c
index a1fe65f5d801..da209b7f47fd 100644
--- a/hw/pci/pcie_sriov.c
+++ b/hw/pci/pcie_sriov.c
@@ -176,6 +176,9 @@ static void register_vfs(PCIDevice *dev)
assert(sriov_cap > 0);
      num_vfs = pci_get_word(dev->config + sriov_cap + PCI_SRIOV_NUM_VF);
+    if (num_vfs > pci_get_word(dev->config + sriov_cap + PCI_SRIOV_TOTAL_VF)) {
+        return;
+    }
dev->exp.sriov_pf.vf = g_new(PCIDevice *, num_vfs);


This reminds me: how is this num_vfs value set on migration?

That's a good point... Actually no consideration of migration is made and SR-IOV is completely broken with it.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]