public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
To: Dmitry Vyukov <[email protected]>
Cc: Necip Fazil Yildiran <[email protected]>,
	[email protected], Hristo Venev <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] io_uring: fix sq array offset calculation
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2020 09:47:06 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

On 7/11/20 9:36 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 7/11/20 9:31 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 5:16 PM Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 7/11/20 3:31 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>>>> rings_size() sets sq_offset to the total size of the rings
>>>> (the returned value which is used for memory allocation).
>>>> This is wrong: sq array should be located within the rings,
>>>> not after them. Set sq_offset to where it should be.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Vyukov <[email protected]>
>>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>>> Cc: Hristo Venev <[email protected]>
>>>> Fixes: 75b28affdd6a ("io_uring: allocate the two rings together")
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> This looks so wrong and yet io_uring works.
>>>> So I am either missing something very obvious here,
>>>> or io_uring worked only due to lucky side-effects
>>>> of rounding size to power-of-2 number of pages
>>>> (which gave it enough slack at the end),
>>>> maybe reading/writing some unrelated memory
>>>> with some sizes.
>>>> If I am wrong, please poke my nose into what I am not seeing.
>>>> Otherwise, we probably need to CC stable as well.
>>>
>>> Well that's a noodle scratcher, it's definitely been working fine,
>>> and I've never seen any out-of-bounds on any of the testing I do.
>>> I regularly run anything with KASAN enabled too.
>>
>> Looking at the code more, I am not sure how it may not corrupt memory.
>> There definitely should be some combinations where accessing
>> sq_entries*sizeof(u32) more memory won't be OK.
>> May be worth adding a test that allocates all possible sizes for sq/cq
>> and fills both rings.
> 
> Yeah, actually doing that right now just to verify it.

Did that, full utilization of the sq ring and the cq ring, and not
seeing anything trigger or wrong. I'd need to look closer, but it
just might be that the power-of-2 sizes end up saving us from doom
and gloom.

-- 
Jens Axboe


  reply	other threads:[~2020-07-11 15:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-11  9:31 [PATCH] io_uring: fix sq array offset calculation Dmitry Vyukov
2020-07-11  9:37 ` Hristo Venev
2020-07-11 15:15 ` Jens Axboe
2020-07-11 15:31   ` Dmitry Vyukov
2020-07-11 15:36     ` Jens Axboe
2020-07-11 15:47       ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2020-07-11 15:52     ` Hristo Venev
2020-07-11 15:55       ` Jens Axboe
2020-07-11 15:56       ` Hristo Venev
2020-07-11 16:16       ` Dmitry Vyukov
2020-07-17 13:48         ` Dmitry Vyukov
2020-07-17 14:05           ` Jens Axboe
2020-07-17 14:08             ` Jens Axboe
2020-07-17 14:08             ` Dmitry Vyukov

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 \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    /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