From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: passt.top; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: passt.top; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=LPHCFdT8; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by passt.top (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB5105A026F for ; Thu, 20 Mar 2025 23:32:40 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1742509959; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=yhmVuAxKWtIqLf92TdDA9xWMtWOSEZXnm81pud8Iqxw=; b=LPHCFdT8zOsCAgjg7ShuHa/Qz4JihqTd1hwNKFC+wD9zpXgSkwOwu9CWuGvFvqcCPUb7Uy oyp4QAvDAr4omQiZ4MPkvSlv6n9Fs72WV1+Wsr87/ZHMZS3Q4JYRThVMOcdq4R3yFrwGyK uIwktR8N0W6HifiXiK/Ll0Bj/LdAQ4g= Received: from mail-wr1-f70.google.com (mail-wr1-f70.google.com [209.85.221.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-673-GuzaShhIOP2V__lEu0gC3Q-1; Thu, 20 Mar 2025 18:32:38 -0400 X-MC-Unique: GuzaShhIOP2V__lEu0gC3Q-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: GuzaShhIOP2V__lEu0gC3Q_1742509957 Received: by mail-wr1-f70.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-39142ce2151so570198f8f.1 for ; Thu, 20 Mar 2025 15:32:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1742509956; x=1743114756; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:organization:references :in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=yhmVuAxKWtIqLf92TdDA9xWMtWOSEZXnm81pud8Iqxw=; b=WSaKbY/Pgace3vL3CvEgHkGQaYMnOWzfXhO/orcmSZmEFGgvmnluefJebfE+642BQX zZhyDXaJgfzte6Hcx5UA0GCcDS2HN2bY2XEgXJxOdKq8aLJ9XHNCgre/8dT1KC+470n5 cCppyP5lsq/nws7dLpVt8oxp9Se1XiGhCNOddjFJaIpwfvAE95Q+n4akwc/j07s6Kiq+ h5Q0+Zw3VChGq0eoiH3DJ63CvYnrK+WXFWcM46qWuCF1oNxf9cT31AB1VwbCo+FnpKQ/ hgwAvPmCxjCWnWtVpVUuCrsuwGLgIy58VxkI9NPRe6IUGKbMjQIge08x1h5PVWkDhh0H Ti6g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyAD/v8NRu5TUYSCEwt5M4JxI8PjUxuE1CZDAtSqMm5prd7q6jf yUmqcxXcHJd7Ln2n0Y9dq+dnBp/iSJDX45kRqlp0r0v7wAopUISKeLeQtZjDbfeyvd3KDPdEgFp j6MXwZYR6Ux0N9qLLC9eTl1IdFbkAkwMDPVzONkqghmjDSuSMpgULqwH5Ag== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctObRO+sWH98pKZ3sZvyAPe4cvQMTYN9K1VtNm8Uni9AE3sVm//rNKGoPAfb3Z FitZCN8aksP/Cl9iNy1kIvLNxhVmmyJwvjpJgyhC8A1beqW8R9LgSUFoISyPwCM/U/OUmJPXyNi FNGp5d6I7u6HnUxU0CDj1WJ+oN5wyH3d8E3RfkM6qPbuFHtwBHTXVA7gHKNqNYSiIcBhwf7XnD7 8kFso8qlhk7KqdxyzY5QbIzCzCMMaa1itH+grjIM/j32CAs8DxZE6hhJJHqJf/onJ8QVuZI17nR L/UhJfrxljNKUsk+GYWhQXsfvWc= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:2d86:b0:391:3f4f:a169 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-3997f90d2f6mr812782f8f.32.1742509956403; Thu, 20 Mar 2025 15:32:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEl1JT0nZo33vyGTG3qSIaQJF8LPJeOPlVBImAw/nGtl7O7AS1nr5NepRsz7LketDcNJEMxtA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:2d86:b0:391:3f4f:a169 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-3997f90d2f6mr812775f8f.32.1742509955947; Thu, 20 Mar 2025 15:32:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maya.myfinge.rs (ifcgrfdd.trafficplex.cloud. [2a10:fc81:a806:d6a9::1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-3997f9b3f7csm707943f8f.49.2025.03.20.15.32.35 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 20 Mar 2025 15:32:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2025 23:32:34 +0100 From: Stefano Brivio To: David Gibson Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/11] Improve robustness of calculations related to frame size limits Message-ID: <20250320233234.3a2abe1d@elisabeth> In-Reply-To: <20250317092424.1461719-1-david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> References: <20250317092424.1461719-1-david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> Organization: Red Hat X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.2.0 (GTK 3.24.41; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-MFC-PROC-ID: R-3oSyl9VD7JbmGiml8LGU-TXo_qz8bhDLTf5LnLu2s_1742509957 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID-Hash: 6HUOKV5MYCAEZ66C7XWBISFFJIDPDETM X-Message-ID-Hash: 6HUOKV5MYCAEZ66C7XWBISFFJIDPDETM X-MailFrom: sbrivio@redhat.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: passt-dev@passt.top X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.8 Precedence: list List-Id: Development discussion and patches for passt Archived-At: Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 20:24:13 +1100 David Gibson wrote: > There are a number of places where we make calculations and checks > around how large frames can be and where they sit in memory. Several > of these are roughly correct, but can be wrong in certain edge cases. > Improve robustness by clarifying what we're doing and being more > careful about the edge cases. > > v2: > * Added additional patches 5..11 > * Patches 1..4 rebased but unchanged Applied... it took me a while to convince myself that the refactored checks in 2/11 and 10/11 (functionally different in one case) are in fact equivalent (and functionally equivalent in the bigger picture for that idx >= p->size now gone from 10/11), but yes, of course, they weren't robust earlier. -- Stefano