lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Jun]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC net-next v4 4/8] vsock: make vsock bind reusable
On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 11:05:43PM +0000, Bobby Eshleman wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 05:25:55PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 10, 2023 at 12:58:31AM +0000, Bobby Eshleman wrote:
>> > This commit makes the bind table management functions in vsock usable
>> > for different bind tables. For use by datagrams in a future patch.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@bytedance.com>
>> > ---
>> > net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>> > 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c
>> > index ef86765f3765..7a3ca4270446 100644
>> > --- a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c
>> > +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c
>> > @@ -230,11 +230,12 @@ static void __vsock_remove_connected(struct vsock_sock *vsk)
>> > sock_put(&vsk->sk);
>> > }
>> >
>> > -static struct sock *__vsock_find_bound_socket(struct sockaddr_vm *addr)
>> > +struct sock *vsock_find_bound_socket_common(struct sockaddr_vm *addr,
>> > + struct list_head *bind_table)
>> > {
>> > struct vsock_sock *vsk;
>> >
>> > - list_for_each_entry(vsk, vsock_bound_sockets(addr), bound_table) {
>> > + list_for_each_entry(vsk, bind_table, bound_table) {
>> > if (vsock_addr_equals_addr(addr, &vsk->local_addr))
>> > return sk_vsock(vsk);
>> >
>> > @@ -247,6 +248,11 @@ static struct sock *__vsock_find_bound_socket(struct sockaddr_vm *addr)
>> > return NULL;
>> > }
>> >
>> > +static struct sock *__vsock_find_bound_socket(struct sockaddr_vm *addr)
>> > +{
>> > + return vsock_find_bound_socket_common(addr, vsock_bound_sockets(addr));
>> > +}
>> > +
>> > static struct sock *__vsock_find_connected_socket(struct sockaddr_vm *src,
>> > struct sockaddr_vm *dst)
>> > {
>> > @@ -646,12 +652,17 @@ static void vsock_pending_work(struct work_struct *work)
>> >
>> > /**** SOCKET OPERATIONS ****/
>> >
>> > -static int __vsock_bind_connectible(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
>> > - struct sockaddr_vm *addr)
>> > +static int vsock_bind_common(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
>> > + struct sockaddr_vm *addr,
>> > + struct list_head *bind_table,
>> > + size_t table_size)
>> > {
>> > static u32 port;
>> > struct sockaddr_vm new_addr;
>> >
>> > + if (table_size < VSOCK_HASH_SIZE)
>> > + return -1;
>>
>> Why we need this check now?
>>
>
>If the table_size is not at least VSOCK_HASH_SIZE then the
>VSOCK_HASH(addr) used later could overflow the table.
>
>Maybe this really deserves a WARN() and a comment?

Yes, please WARN_ONCE() should be enough.

Stefano

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-06-23 10:17    [W:0.133 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site