kvm: Fix irq route entries exceeding KVM_MAX_IRQ_ROUTES
These days, we experienced one guest crash with 8 cores and 3 disks, with qemu error logs as bellow: qemu-system-x86_64: /build/qemu-2.0.0/kvm-all.c:984: kvm_irqchip_commit_routes: Assertion `ret == 0' failed. And then we found one patch(bdf026317d) in qemu tree, which said could fix this bug. Execute the following script will reproduce the BUG quickly: irq_affinity.sh ======================================================================== vda_irq_num=25 vdb_irq_num=27 while [ 1 ] do for irq in {1,2,4,8,10,20,40,80} do echo $irq > /proc/irq/$vda_irq_num/smp_affinity echo $irq > /proc/irq/$vdb_irq_num/smp_affinity dd if=/dev/vda of=/dev/zero bs=4K count=100 iflag=direct dd if=/dev/vdb of=/dev/zero bs=4K count=100 iflag=direct done done ======================================================================== The following qemu log is added in the qemu code and is displayed when this bug reproduced: kvm_irqchip_commit_routes: max gsi: 1008, nr_allocated_irq_routes: 1024, irq_routes->nr: 1024, gsi_count: 1024. That's to say when irq_routes->nr == 1024, there are 1024 routing entries, but in the kernel code when routes->nr >= 1024, will just return -EINVAL; The nr is the number of the routing entries which is in of [1 ~ KVM_MAX_IRQ_ROUTES], not the index in [0 ~ KVM_MAX_IRQ_ROUTES - 1]. This patch fix the BUG above. Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <lixiubo@cmss.chinamobile.com> Signed-off-by: Wei Tang <tangwei@cmss.chinamobile.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Zhuoyu <zhangzhuoyu@cmss.chinamobile.com> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
5b8abf1f33
commit
caf1ff26e1
|
@ -2941,7 +2941,7 @@ static long kvm_vm_ioctl(struct file *filp,
|
|||
if (copy_from_user(&routing, argp, sizeof(routing)))
|
||||
goto out;
|
||||
r = -EINVAL;
|
||||
if (routing.nr >= KVM_MAX_IRQ_ROUTES)
|
||||
if (routing.nr > KVM_MAX_IRQ_ROUTES)
|
||||
goto out;
|
||||
if (routing.flags)
|
||||
goto out;
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user