public inbox for io-uring@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ömer Mete Kaya" <omermetekaya0@gmail.com>
To: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <gabriel@krisman.be>, axboe@kernel.dk
Cc: io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] io_uring: fix out-of-bounds bvec access in io_vec_fill_kern_bvec
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2026 22:55:09 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20874bd2-f827-4ef8-9855-dc8aaec874fa@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87se2pwhzh.fsf@mailhost.krisman.be>



On 10/1/26 18:36, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
> Ömer Mete Kaya <omermetekaya0@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> for_each_mp_bvec() dereferences src_bvec[bi_idx] in the loop condition
>> before the body is entered, with no guard against bi_idx reaching
>> imu->nr_bvecs. iov_kern_bvec_size() stops iterating when i reaches
>> imu->nr_bvecs even if bi_size is still non-zero, so the fill loop can
>> walk past the end of the bvec array and overrun res_bvec[].
>>
>> Open-code the loop with an explicit bi_idx < imu->nr_bvecs check before
>> the dereference, matching the termination condition in
>> iov_kern_bvec_size().
> 
> Do you have a reproducer?  This should be checked in iov_kern_bvec_size.
> We make sure it doesn't go through imu->len which should match bv_len,
> IIUC.

Yes I checked more and looks like the *bug* is unreachable via existing
in-tree callers.>>
>> Fixes: 1045afae4b88 ("io_uring: support vectored kernel fixed buffer")

It doesnt fix something broken actually, more like a defensive refactoring.

>> Signed-off-by: Ömer Mete Kaya <omermetekaya0@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  io_uring/rsrc.c | 7 ++++++-
>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/io_uring/rsrc.c b/io_uring/rsrc.c
>> index 51b46e624..3d29a0c7b 100644
>> --- a/io_uring/rsrc.c
>> +++ b/io_uring/rsrc.c
>> @@ -1614,8 +1614,13 @@ static int io_vec_fill_kern_bvec(int ddir, struct iov_iter *iter,
>>  		struct bio_vec bv;
>>
>>  		bvec_iter_advance(src_bvec, &bi, offset);
>> -		for_each_mp_bvec(bv, src_bvec, bi, bi)
>> +		while (bi.bi_size) {
> 
> bi.bi_size is the first condition of for_each_mp_bvec.  Do you really
> need an open coded loop?  If there is an issue, can we just add the
> check below?

mp_bvec_iter_bvec() is called in the for-loop condition not the body:

    for (iter = (start);
        (iter).bi_size &&
            ((bvl = mp_bvec_iter_bvec((bio_vec), (iter))), 1); <-***
        bvec_iter_advance_single(...))

src_bvec[bi_idx] is dereferenced before the loop body is entered.
A check inside the body executes after the out-of-bounds read has
already occurred. The open-coded loop is the way to check bi_idx
before the dereference. The question is "should the kernel be defensive
itself or trust the callers?". If you find these kinds of defensive
controls unnecessary, happy to withdraw the patch instead of releasing v2.

kind regards,

Ömer

      reply	other threads:[~2026-10-01 19:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-01 14:23 [PATCH] io_uring: fix out-of-bounds bvec access in io_vec_fill_kern_bvec Ömer Mete Kaya
2026-10-01 15:36 ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2026-10-01 19:55   ` Ömer Mete Kaya [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20874bd2-f827-4ef8-9855-dc8aaec874fa@gmail.com \
    --to=omermetekaya0@gmail.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=gabriel@krisman.be \
    --cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox