| Message ID | 1301982971-4574-1-git-send-email-harsh@linux.vnet.ibm.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 6:56 AM, Harsh Prateek Bora <harsh@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > The nwnames field in TWALK message is assumed to be >=0 and <= MAXWELEM > which is defined as macro P9_MAXWELEM (16) in virtio-9p.h as per 9p2000 > RFC. Appropriate changes are required in V9fsWalkState and v9fs_walk. > > v3: > - Updated if-else conditions to appropriately handle nwnames = 0. > > v2: > - Added check in v9fs_walk_complete as well. > > Signed-off-by: Harsh Prateek Bora <harsh@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > --- > hw/9pfs/virtio-9p.c | 7 +++++-- > hw/9pfs/virtio-9p.h | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) hw/virtio-9p.c I think you've submitted a patch against an internal tree that isn't upstream. Stefan
On 04/05/2011 02:24 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 6:56 AM, Harsh Prateek Bora > <harsh@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: >> The nwnames field in TWALK message is assumed to be>=0 and<= MAXWELEM >> which is defined as macro P9_MAXWELEM (16) in virtio-9p.h as per 9p2000 >> RFC. Appropriate changes are required in V9fsWalkState and v9fs_walk. >> >> v3: >> - Updated if-else conditions to appropriately handle nwnames = 0. >> >> v2: >> - Added check in v9fs_walk_complete as well. >> >> Signed-off-by: Harsh Prateek Bora<harsh@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >> --- >> hw/9pfs/virtio-9p.c | 7 +++++-- >> hw/9pfs/virtio-9p.h | 2 +- >> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > hw/virtio-9p.c > > I think you've submitted a patch against an internal tree that isn't upstream. Yes, it is based on a patch yet to be merged in mainline by Aneesh which will move 9p files into a separate folder, however, I shall repost an updated version of the patch based on current directory structure. regards, Harsh > > Stefan
diff --git a/hw/9pfs/virtio-9p.c b/hw/9pfs/virtio-9p.c index 6c06bb3..1d49970 100644 --- a/hw/9pfs/virtio-9p.c +++ b/hw/9pfs/virtio-9p.c @@ -1621,7 +1621,7 @@ static void v9fs_walk_complete(V9fsState *s, V9fsWalkState *vs, int err) { complete_pdu(s, vs->pdu, err); - if (vs->nwnames) { + if (vs->nwnames && vs->nwnames <= P9_MAXWELEM) { for (vs->name_idx = 0; vs->name_idx < vs->nwnames; vs->name_idx++) { v9fs_string_free(&vs->wnames[vs->name_idx]); } @@ -1717,7 +1717,7 @@ static void v9fs_walk(V9fsState *s, V9fsPDU *pdu) vs->offset += pdu_unmarshal(vs->pdu, vs->offset, "ddw", &fid, &newfid, &vs->nwnames); - if (vs->nwnames) { + if (vs->nwnames && vs->nwnames <= P9_MAXWELEM) { vs->wnames = qemu_mallocz(sizeof(vs->wnames[0]) * vs->nwnames); vs->qids = qemu_mallocz(sizeof(vs->qids[0]) * vs->nwnames); @@ -1726,6 +1726,9 @@ static void v9fs_walk(V9fsState *s, V9fsPDU *pdu) vs->offset += pdu_unmarshal(vs->pdu, vs->offset, "s", &vs->wnames[i]); } + } else if (vs->nwnames >= P9_MAXWELEM) { + err = -EINVAL; + goto out; } vs->fidp = lookup_fid(s, fid); diff --git a/hw/9pfs/virtio-9p.h b/hw/9pfs/virtio-9p.h index 6c6931e..34f9bb3 100644 --- a/hw/9pfs/virtio-9p.h +++ b/hw/9pfs/virtio-9p.h @@ -289,7 +289,7 @@ typedef struct V9fsStatStateDotl { typedef struct V9fsWalkState { V9fsPDU *pdu; size_t offset; - int16_t nwnames; + uint16_t nwnames; int name_idx; V9fsQID *qids; V9fsFidState *fidp;
The nwnames field in TWALK message is assumed to be >=0 and <= MAXWELEM which is defined as macro P9_MAXWELEM (16) in virtio-9p.h as per 9p2000 RFC. Appropriate changes are required in V9fsWalkState and v9fs_walk. v3: - Updated if-else conditions to appropriately handle nwnames = 0. v2: - Added check in v9fs_walk_complete as well. Signed-off-by: Harsh Prateek Bora <harsh@linux.vnet.ibm.com> --- hw/9pfs/virtio-9p.c | 7 +++++-- hw/9pfs/virtio-9p.h | 2 +- 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)