* Peter Xu (pet...@redhat.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 06:15:54PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > * Peter Xu (pet...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 08:00:34PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git)
> > > wrote:
> > > > From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilb...@redhat.com>
> > > >
> > > > Stash the RAMBlock and offset for later use looking up
> > > > addresses.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Dr. David Alan Gilbert <dgilb...@redhat.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > hw/virtio/trace-events | 1 +
> > > > hw/virtio/vhost-user.c | 11 +++++++++++
> > > > 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/hw/virtio/trace-events b/hw/virtio/trace-events
> > > > index f7be340a45..1fd194363a 100644
> > > > --- a/hw/virtio/trace-events
> > > > +++ b/hw/virtio/trace-events
> > > > @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
> > > > # hw/virtio/vhost-user.c
> > > > vhost_user_postcopy_listen(void) ""
> > > > vhost_user_set_mem_table_postcopy(uint64_t client_addr, uint64_t qhva,
> > > > int reply_i, int region_i) "client:%"PRIx64" for hva: %"PRIx64" reply
> > > > %d region %d"
> > > > +vhost_user_set_mem_table_withfd(int index, const char *name, uint64_t
> > > > memory_size, uint64_t guest_phys_addr, uint64_t userspace_addr,
> > > > uint64_t offset) "%d:%s: size:%"PRIx64" GPA:%"PRIx64"
> > > > QVA/userspace:%"PRIx64" RB offset:%"PRIx64
> > > >
> > > > # hw/virtio/virtio.c
> > > > virtqueue_alloc_element(void *elem, size_t sz, unsigned in_num,
> > > > unsigned out_num) "elem %p size %zd in_num %u out_num %u"
> > > > diff --git a/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c b/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c
> > > > index 6be3e7ff2d..3185af7a45 100644
> > > > --- a/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c
> > > > +++ b/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c
> > > > @@ -133,6 +133,11 @@ struct vhost_user {
> > > > NotifierWithReturn postcopy_notifier;
> > > > struct PostCopyFD postcopy_fd;
> > > > uint64_t
> > > > postcopy_client_bases[VHOST_MEMORY_MAX_NREGIONS];
> > > > + RAMBlock *region_rb[VHOST_MEMORY_MAX_NREGIONS];
> > > > + /* The offset from the start of the RAMBlock to the start of the
> > > > + * vhost region.
> > > > + */
> > > > + ram_addr_t region_rb_offset[VHOST_MEMORY_MAX_NREGIONS];
> > >
> > > Here the array size is VHOST_MEMORY_MAX_NREGIONS, while...
> > >
> > > > };
> > > >
> > > > static bool ioeventfd_enabled(void)
> > > > @@ -324,8 +329,14 @@ static int vhost_user_set_mem_table(struct
> > > > vhost_dev *dev,
> > > > assert((uintptr_t)reg->userspace_addr == reg->userspace_addr);
> > > > mr = memory_region_from_host((void
> > > > *)(uintptr_t)reg->userspace_addr,
> > > > &offset);
> > > > + u->region_rb_offset[i] = offset;
> > > > + u->region_rb[i] = mr->ram_block;
> > >
> > > ... can i>=VHOST_MEMORY_MAX_NREGIONS here? Or do we only need to note
> > > this down if fd > 0 below? Thanks,
> >
> > I don't *think* so - I mean:
> > for (i = 0; i < dev->mem->nregions; ++i) {
> >
> > so if that's the maximum number of regions and that's the number of
> > regions we should be safe???
>
> That's my concern - looks like dev->mem->nregions can be bigger than
> that? At least I didn't really see a restriction on its size. The size
> is changed in following stack:
>
> vhost_region_add
> vhost_set_memory
> vhost_dev_assign_memory
>
> And it's dynamic extended, without checks.
>
> Indeed in the function vhost_user_set_mem_table() we have:
>
> int fds[VHOST_MEMORY_MAX_NREGIONS];
>
> But we are safe iiuc because we also have assertions to protect:
>
> assert(fd_num < VHOST_MEMORY_MAX_NREGIONS);
> fds[fd_num++] = fd;
>
> Do we at least need that assert?
I think you're right that it can be validly larger than MAX_NREGIONS;
I think the idea is that the dev->mem->regions can be larger,
with the limit being only on the number that actually have fd's.
I'll rework the structure.
Dave
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Peter Xu
--
Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK
