All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "De Lara Guarch, Pablo" <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
To: "Gonzalez Monroy, Sergio" <sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com>,
	"Thomas Monjalon" <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cryptodev: fix NULL pointer dereference
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2017 10:48:48 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <E115CCD9D858EF4F90C690B0DCB4D8976CBE5A88@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0de23010-5d28-68a9-9349-eea9cad6ccb7@intel.com>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gonzalez Monroy, Sergio
> Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2017 11:18 AM
> To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> Cc: De Lara Guarch, Pablo <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>;
> dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cryptodev: fix NULL pointer dereference
> 
> On 01/08/2017 10:35, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 01/08/2017 10:13, Sergio Gonzalez Monroy:
> >> On 31/07/2017 20:33, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >>> 31/07/2017 11:18, Pablo de Lara:
> >>>> When register a crypto driver, a cryptodev driver structure was
> >>>> being allocated, using malloc.
> >>>> Since this call may fail, it is safer to allocate this memory
> >>>> statically in each PMD, so driver registration will never fail.
> >>>>
> >>>> Coverity issue: 158645
> >>>>
> >>>> Fixes: 7a364faef185 ("cryptodev: remove crypto device type
> >>>> enumeration")
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Pablo de Lara <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>
> >>>> Changes in v2:
> >>>>
> >>>> - Allocate statically the cryptodev driver structure,
> >>>>     instead of using malloc, that can potentially fail.
> >>>>
> >>>>    drivers/crypto/aesni_gcm/aesni_gcm_pmd.c    |  5 ++++-
> >>>>    drivers/crypto/aesni_mb/rte_aesni_mb_pmd.c  |  6 +++++-
> >>>>    drivers/crypto/armv8/rte_armv8_pmd.c        |  9 ++++++---
> >>>>    drivers/crypto/dpaa2_sec/dpaa2_sec_dpseci.c |  5 ++++-
> >>>>    drivers/crypto/kasumi/rte_kasumi_pmd.c      |  5 ++++-
> >>>>    drivers/crypto/null/null_crypto_pmd.c       |  5 ++++-
> >>>>    drivers/crypto/openssl/rte_openssl_pmd.c    |  5 ++++-
> >>>>    drivers/crypto/qat/rte_qat_cryptodev.c      |  7 +++++--
> >>>>    drivers/crypto/scheduler/scheduler_pmd.c    |  5 ++++-
> >>>>    drivers/crypto/snow3g/rte_snow3g_pmd.c      |  5 ++++-
> >>>>    drivers/crypto/zuc/rte_zuc_pmd.c            |  5 ++++-
> >>>>    lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c        | 18 +++++------------
> >>>>    lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.h        | 20 -------------------
> >>>>    lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev_pmd.h    | 30
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>    14 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
> >>> This is a big change for a small/unlikely issue.
> >>> The main benefit of this patch is an allocation cleanup.
> >>> I think it is better to wait 17.11 cycle to integrate it.
> >> We initially thought of exit given that it is a constructor and if
> >> you fail to allocate memory at this stage, things are likely not
> >> going to work out anyway.
> > You don't know how the application wants to manage it.
> 
> IMHO setting an internal variable indicating an error in constructors and
> then reporting the problem during EAL init seems overly complex.
> I think the proposed change is a cleaner solution.
> 
> >> The patch is an API change, do we really want to break again (we are
> >> breaking in this release) next release?
> > Good question. Any opinions?
> 
> Merge the patch unless there are already outstanding and/or planned
> changes for the next release that are going to break ABI/API?

There is another patchset that was postponed for next release, because the
compilation was broken in one of the patches (just double checked and it is easy to fix),
and by then, I thought that no ABI/API was being broken,
but it will be (my bad here). This is the patchset I am talking about:

[PATCH v2 0/4] cryptodev vdev changes for -rc2
 http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-July/071160.html

So we have two options here:
1 - Get both patches now, since we are breaking the ABI in this release (as Sergio pointed out).
2 - Postpone both changes to next release.

I would go for option 1, as there are no other changes expected for next release
(only one function, rte_cryptodev_create_vdev, will be removed).

Thanks,
Pablo

> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Sergio

  reply	other threads:[~2017-08-01 10:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-07-31  2:30 [PATCH] cryptodev: fix NULL pointer dereference Pablo de Lara
2017-07-31  9:18 ` [PATCH v2] " Pablo de Lara
2017-07-31 19:33   ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-08-01  7:10     ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2017-08-01  8:13     ` Sergio Gonzalez Monroy
2017-08-01  9:35       ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-08-01 10:17         ` Sergio Gonzalez Monroy
2017-08-01 10:48           ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo [this message]
2017-08-01 12:36             ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-08-16  2:41   ` [PATCH v3] cryptodev: allocate driver structure statically Pablo de Lara
2017-09-04 10:38     ` Rybalchenko, Kirill
2017-09-06 10:27       ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2017-07-31 12:32 ` [PATCH] cryptodev: fix NULL pointer dereference Sergio Gonzalez Monroy
2017-07-31 15:22   ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-08-01  7:09     ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo

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=E115CCD9D858EF4F90C690B0DCB4D8976CBE5A88@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com \
    --to=pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=jblunck@infradead.org \
    --cc=sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.