From: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
To: "Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@redhat.com>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk>,
QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
Bug 1880355 <1880355@bugs.launchpad.net>,
Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Bug 1880355] [NEW] Length restrictions for fw_cfg_dma_transfer?
Date: Sun, 24 May 2020 14:40:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFEAcA83E33xNjhXvbZr9oe7TO9kMa0nArroCA_mY3zy+0bq2g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ced59c5e-01e9-9da6-5191-9d34ffa976b0@redhat.com>
On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 11:30, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> wrote:
> It looks to me a normal behavior for a DMA device. DMA devices have a
> different address space view than the CPUs.
> Also note the fw_cfg is a generic device, not restricted to the x86 arch.
In an ideal world all our DMA devices would use some kind of common
framework or design pattern so they didn't hog all the CPU
and/or spend minutes with the BQL held if the guest requests
an enormous-sized DMA. In practice many of them just have
a simple "loop until the DMA transfer is complete" implementation...
thanks
-- PMM
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peter Maydell <1880355@bugs.launchpad.net>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Bug 1880355] [NEW] Length restrictions for fw_cfg_dma_transfer?
Date: Sun, 24 May 2020 13:40:41 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFEAcA83E33xNjhXvbZr9oe7TO9kMa0nArroCA_mY3zy+0bq2g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20200524134041.tI5QT94m3zkxYQuM-67Y8mKPhlcomWmPI6Mj9OctEf0@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: ced59c5e-01e9-9da6-5191-9d34ffa976b0@redhat.com
On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 11:30, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> wrote:
> It looks to me a normal behavior for a DMA device. DMA devices have a
> different address space view than the CPUs.
> Also note the fw_cfg is a generic device, not restricted to the x86 arch.
In an ideal world all our DMA devices would use some kind of common
framework or design pattern so they didn't hog all the CPU
and/or spend minutes with the BQL held if the guest requests
an enormous-sized DMA. In practice many of them just have
a simple "loop until the DMA transfer is complete" implementation...
thanks
-- PMM
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of qemu-
devel-ml, which is subscribed to QEMU.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1880355
Title:
Length restrictions for fw_cfg_dma_transfer?
Status in QEMU:
New
Bug description:
For me, this takes close to 3 minutes at 100% CPU:
echo "outl 0x518 0x9596ffff" | ./i386-softmmu/qemu-system-i386 -M q35 -m 32 -nographic -accel qtest -monitor none -serial none -qtest stdio
#0 phys_page_find (d=0x606000035d80, addr=136728041144404) at /exec.c:338
#1 address_space_lookup_region (d=0x606000035d80, addr=136728041144404, resolve_subpage=true) at /exec.c:363
#2 address_space_translate_internal (d=0x606000035d80, addr=136728041144404, xlat=0x7fff1fc0d070, plen=0x7fff1fc0d090, resolve_subpage=true) at /exec.c:382
#3 flatview_do_translate (fv=0x606000035d20, addr=136728041144404, xlat=0x7fff1fc0d070, plen_out=0x7fff1fc0d090, page_mask_out=0x0, is_write=true, is_mmio=true, target_as=0x7fff1fc0ce10, attrs=...)
pment/qemu/exec.c:520
#4 flatview_translate (fv=0x606000035d20, addr=136728041144404, xlat=0x7fff1fc0d070, plen=0x7fff1fc0d090, is_write=true, attrs=...) at /exec.c:586
#5 flatview_write_continue (fv=0x606000035d20, addr=136728041144404, attrs=..., ptr=0x7fff1fc0d660, len=172, addr1=136728041144400, l=172, mr=0x557fd54e77e0 <io_mem_unassigned>)
pment/qemu/exec.c:3160
#6 flatview_write (fv=0x606000035d20, addr=136728041144064, attrs=..., buf=0x7fff1fc0d660, len=512) at /exec.c:3177
#7 address_space_write (as=0x557fd54e7a00 <address_space_memory>, addr=136728041144064, attrs=..., buf=0x7fff1fc0d660, len=512) at /exec.c:3271
#8 dma_memory_set (as=0x557fd54e7a00 <address_space_memory>, addr=136728041144064, c=0 '\000', len=1378422272) at /dma-helpers.c:31
#9 fw_cfg_dma_transfer (s=0x61a000001e80) at /hw/nvram/fw_cfg.c:400
#10 fw_cfg_dma_mem_write (opaque=0x61a000001e80, addr=4, value=4294940309, size=4) at /hw/nvram/fw_cfg.c:467
#11 memory_region_write_accessor (mr=0x61a000002200, addr=4, value=0x7fff1fc0e3d0, size=4, shift=0, mask=4294967295, attrs=...) at /memory.c:483
#12 access_with_adjusted_size (addr=4, value=0x7fff1fc0e3d0, size=4, access_size_min=1, access_size_max=8, access_fn=0x557fd2288c80 <memory_region_write_accessor>, mr=0x61a000002200, attrs=...)
pment/qemu/memory.c:539
#13 memory_region_dispatch_write (mr=0x61a000002200, addr=4, data=4294940309, op=MO_32, attrs=...) at /memory.c:1476
#14 flatview_write_continue (fv=0x606000035f00, addr=1304, attrs=..., ptr=0x7fff1fc0ec40, len=4, addr1=4, l=4, mr=0x61a000002200) at /exec.c:3137
#15 flatview_write (fv=0x606000035f00, addr=1304, attrs=..., buf=0x7fff1fc0ec40, len=4) at /exec.c:3177
#16 address_space_write (as=0x557fd54e7bc0 <address_space_io>, addr=1304, attrs=..., buf=0x7fff1fc0ec40, len=4) at /exec.c:3271
It looks like fw_cfg_dma_transfer gets the address(136728041144064) and length(1378422272) for the read from the value provided as input 4294940309 (0xFFFF9695) which lands in pcbios. Should there be any limits on the length of guest-memory that fw_cfg should populate?
Found by libfuzzer
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1880355/+subscriptions
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-24 13:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-24 4:12 [Bug 1880355] [NEW] Length restrictions for fw_cfg_dma_transfer? Alexander Bulekov
2020-05-24 10:30 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-05-24 10:30 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-05-24 13:40 ` Peter Maydell [this message]
2020-05-24 13:40 ` Peter Maydell
2020-05-24 14:27 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-05-24 14:27 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-05-25 13:59 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-05-25 9:14 ` Mark Cave-Ayland
2020-05-25 9:14 ` Mark Cave-Ayland
2021-06-10 15:50 ` [Bug 1880355] " Thomas Huth
2021-06-14 23:35 ` Alexander Bulekov
2021-06-15 18:17 ` Thomas Huth
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=CAFEAcA83E33xNjhXvbZr9oe7TO9kMa0nArroCA_mY3zy+0bq2g@mail.gmail.com \
--to=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=1880355@bugs.launchpad.net \
--cc=kraxel@redhat.com \
--cc=lersek@redhat.com \
--cc=mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=philmd@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).