1. Patchew
  2. linux
  3. View series

[PATCH net] vsock/virtio: cap TX credit to local buffer size

Melbin K Mathew posted 1 patch 3 days, 12 hours ago
There is a newer version of this series
net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
[PATCH net] vsock/virtio: cap TX credit to local buffer size
Posted by Melbin K Mathew 3 days, 12 hours ago 
The virtio vsock transport currently derives its TX credit directly
from peer_buf_alloc, which is set from the remote endpoint's
SO_VM_SOCKETS_BUFFER_SIZE value.

On the host side this means that the amount of data we are willing to
queue for a connection is scaled by a guest-chosen buffer size,
rather than the host's own vsock configuration. A malicious guest can
advertise a large buffer and read slowly, causing the host to allocate
a correspondingly large amount of sk_buff memory.

Introduce a small helper, virtio_transport_peer_buf_alloc(), that
returns min(peer_buf_alloc, buf_alloc), and use it wherever we consume
peer_buf_alloc:

  - virtio_transport_get_credit()
  - virtio_transport_has_space()
  - virtio_transport_seqpacket_enqueue()

This ensures the effective TX window is bounded by both the peer's
advertised buffer and our own buf_alloc (already clamped to
buffer_max_size via SO_VM_SOCKETS_BUFFER_MAX_SIZE), so a remote guest
cannot force the host to queue more data than allowed by the host's
own vsock settings.

On an unpatched Ubuntu 22.04 host (~64 GiB RAM), running a PoC with
32 guest vsock connections advertising 2 GiB each and reading slowly
drove Slab/SUnreclaim from ~0.5 GiB to ~57 GiB and the system only
recovered after killing the QEMU process.

With this patch applied, rerunning the same PoC yields:

  Before:
    MemFree:        ~61.6 GiB
    MemAvailable:   ~62.3 GiB
    Slab:           ~142 MiB
    SUnreclaim:     ~117 MiB

  After 32 high-credit connections:
    MemFree:        ~61.5 GiB
    MemAvailable:   ~62.3 GiB
    Slab:           ~178 MiB
    SUnreclaim:     ~152 MiB

i.e. only ~35 MiB increase in Slab/SUnreclaim, no host OOM, and the
guest remains responsive.

Fixes: d021c344051a ("VSOCK: Introduce VM Sockets")
Reported-by: Melbin K Mathew <mlbnkm1@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Melbin K Mathew <mlbnkm1@gmail.com>
---
 net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
index dcc8a1d58..f5afedf01 100644
--- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
+++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
@@ -491,6 +491,25 @@ void virtio_transport_consume_skb_sent(struct sk_buff *skb, bool consume)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(virtio_transport_consume_skb_sent);
 
+/*
+ * Return the effective peer buffer size for TX credit computation.
+ *
+ * The peer advertises its receive buffer via peer_buf_alloc, but we
+ * cap that to our local buf_alloc (derived from
+ * SO_VM_SOCKETS_BUFFER_SIZE and already clamped to buffer_max_size)
+ * so that a remote endpoint cannot force us to queue more data than
+ * our own configuration allows.
+ */
+static u32 virtio_transport_peer_buf_alloc(struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs)
+{
+	u32 peer  = vvs->peer_buf_alloc;
+	u32 local = vvs->buf_alloc;
+
+	if (peer > local)
+		return local;
+	return peer;
+}
+
 u32 virtio_transport_get_credit(struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs, u32 credit)
 {
 	u32 ret;
@@ -499,7 +518,8 @@ u32 virtio_transport_get_credit(struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs, u32 credit)
 		return 0;
 
 	spin_lock_bh(&vvs->tx_lock);
-	ret = vvs->peer_buf_alloc - (vvs->tx_cnt - vvs->peer_fwd_cnt);
+	ret = virtio_transport_peer_buf_alloc(vvs) -
+             (vvs->tx_cnt - vvs->peer_fwd_cnt);
 	if (ret > credit)
 		ret = credit;
 	vvs->tx_cnt += ret;
@@ -831,7 +851,7 @@ virtio_transport_seqpacket_enqueue(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
 
 	spin_lock_bh(&vvs->tx_lock);
 
-	if (len > vvs->peer_buf_alloc) {
+	if (len > virtio_transport_peer_buf_alloc(vvs)) {
 		spin_unlock_bh(&vvs->tx_lock);
 		return -EMSGSIZE;
 	}
@@ -882,7 +902,8 @@ static s64 virtio_transport_has_space(struct vsock_sock *vsk)
 	struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs = vsk->trans;
 	s64 bytes;
 
-	bytes = (s64)vvs->peer_buf_alloc - (vvs->tx_cnt - vvs->peer_fwd_cnt);
+	bytes = (s64)virtio_transport_peer_buf_alloc(vvs) -
+               (vvs->tx_cnt - vvs->peer_fwd_cnt);
 	if (bytes < 0)
 		bytes = 0;
 
-- 
2.34.1
Re: [PATCH net] vsock/virtio: cap TX credit to local buffer size
Posted by Stefano Garzarella 3 days, 11 hours ago 
On Wed, Dec 10, 2025 at 02:32:59PM +0100, Melbin K Mathew wrote:
>The virtio vsock transport currently derives its TX credit directly
>from peer_buf_alloc, which is set from the remote endpoint's
>SO_VM_SOCKETS_BUFFER_SIZE value.
>
>On the host side this means that the amount of data we are willing to
>queue for a connection is scaled by a guest-chosen buffer size,
>rather than the host's own vsock configuration. A malicious guest can
>advertise a large buffer and read slowly, causing the host to allocate
>a correspondingly large amount of sk_buff memory.
>
>Introduce a small helper, virtio_transport_peer_buf_alloc(), that
>returns min(peer_buf_alloc, buf_alloc), and use it wherever we consume
>peer_buf_alloc:
>
>  - virtio_transport_get_credit()
>  - virtio_transport_has_space()
>  - virtio_transport_seqpacket_enqueue()
>
>This ensures the effective TX window is bounded by both the peer's
>advertised buffer and our own buf_alloc (already clamped to
>buffer_max_size via SO_VM_SOCKETS_BUFFER_MAX_SIZE), so a remote guest
>cannot force the host to queue more data than allowed by the host's
>own vsock settings.
>
>On an unpatched Ubuntu 22.04 host (~64 GiB RAM), running a PoC with
>32 guest vsock connections advertising 2 GiB each and reading slowly
>drove Slab/SUnreclaim from ~0.5 GiB to ~57 GiB and the system only
>recovered after killing the QEMU process.
>
>With this patch applied, rerunning the same PoC yields:
>
>  Before:
>    MemFree:        ~61.6 GiB
>    MemAvailable:   ~62.3 GiB
>    Slab:           ~142 MiB
>    SUnreclaim:     ~117 MiB
>
>  After 32 high-credit connections:
>    MemFree:        ~61.5 GiB
>    MemAvailable:   ~62.3 GiB
>    Slab:           ~178 MiB
>    SUnreclaim:     ~152 MiB
>
>i.e. only ~35 MiB increase in Slab/SUnreclaim, no host OOM, and the
>guest remains responsive.
>
>Fixes: d021c344051a ("VSOCK: Introduce VM Sockets")
>Reported-by: Melbin K Mathew <mlbnkm1@gmail.com>
>Signed-off-by: Melbin K Mathew <mlbnkm1@gmail.com>
>---
> net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Thanks, in addition to Michael comments:

Please run `./scripts/checkpatch.pl`, there are several warnings/errors 
mainly related to spaces/tabs.

Also please use `./scripts/get_maintainer.pl` since several maintainers 
are missing in CC.

>
>diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
>index dcc8a1d58..f5afedf01 100644
>--- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
>+++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
>@@ -491,6 +491,25 @@ void virtio_transport_consume_skb_sent(struct sk_buff *skb, bool consume)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(virtio_transport_consume_skb_sent);
>
>+/*
>+ * Return the effective peer buffer size for TX credit computation.
>+ *
>+ * The peer advertises its receive buffer via peer_buf_alloc, but we
>+ * cap that to our local buf_alloc (derived from
>+ * SO_VM_SOCKETS_BUFFER_SIZE and already clamped to buffer_max_size)
>+ * so that a remote endpoint cannot force us to queue more data than
>+ * our own configuration allows.
>+ */
>+static u32 virtio_transport_peer_buf_alloc(struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs)

This maybe can be called virtio_transport_tx_buf_alloc or something like 
that, to make it clear that should be used in the TX path. (not a strong 
opinion)

Thanks,
Stefano

>+{
>+	u32 peer  = vvs->peer_buf_alloc;
>+	u32 local = vvs->buf_alloc;
>+
>+	if (peer > local)
>+		return local;
>+	return peer;
>+}
>+
> u32 virtio_transport_get_credit(struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs, u32 credit)
> {
> 	u32 ret;
>@@ -499,7 +518,8 @@ u32 virtio_transport_get_credit(struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs, u32 credit)
> 		return 0;
>
> 	spin_lock_bh(&vvs->tx_lock);
>-	ret = vvs->peer_buf_alloc - (vvs->tx_cnt - vvs->peer_fwd_cnt);
>+	ret = virtio_transport_peer_buf_alloc(vvs) -
>+             (vvs->tx_cnt - vvs->peer_fwd_cnt);
> 	if (ret > credit)
> 		ret = credit;
> 	vvs->tx_cnt += ret;
>@@ -831,7 +851,7 @@ virtio_transport_seqpacket_enqueue(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
>
> 	spin_lock_bh(&vvs->tx_lock);
>
>-	if (len > vvs->peer_buf_alloc) {
>+	if (len > virtio_transport_peer_buf_alloc(vvs)) {
> 		spin_unlock_bh(&vvs->tx_lock);
> 		return -EMSGSIZE;
> 	}
>@@ -882,7 +902,8 @@ static s64 virtio_transport_has_space(struct vsock_sock *vsk)
> 	struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs = vsk->trans;
> 	s64 bytes;
>
>-	bytes = (s64)vvs->peer_buf_alloc - (vvs->tx_cnt - vvs->peer_fwd_cnt);
>+	bytes = (s64)virtio_transport_peer_buf_alloc(vvs) -
>+               (vvs->tx_cnt - vvs->peer_fwd_cnt);
> 	if (bytes < 0)
> 		bytes = 0;
>
>-- 
>2.34.1
>
Re: [PATCH net] vsock/virtio: cap TX credit to local buffer size
Posted by Michael S. Tsirkin 3 days, 12 hours ago 
thanks for the patch! yet something to improve:

On Wed, Dec 10, 2025 at 02:32:59PM +0100, Melbin K Mathew wrote:
> The virtio vsock transport currently derives its TX credit directly
> from peer_buf_alloc, which is set from the remote endpoint's
> SO_VM_SOCKETS_BUFFER_SIZE value.
> 
> On the host side this means that the amount of data we are willing to
> queue for a connection is scaled by a guest-chosen buffer size,
> rather than the host's own vsock configuration. A malicious guest can
> advertise a large buffer and read slowly, causing the host to allocate
> a correspondingly large amount of sk_buff memory.
> 
> Introduce a small helper, virtio_transport_peer_buf_alloc(), that
> returns min(peer_buf_alloc, buf_alloc), and use it wherever we consume
> peer_buf_alloc:
> 
>   - virtio_transport_get_credit()
>   - virtio_transport_has_space()
>   - virtio_transport_seqpacket_enqueue()
> 
> This ensures the effective TX window is bounded by both the peer's
> advertised buffer and our own buf_alloc (already clamped to
> buffer_max_size via SO_VM_SOCKETS_BUFFER_MAX_SIZE), so a remote guest
> cannot force the host to queue more data than allowed by the host's
> own vsock settings.
> 
> On an unpatched Ubuntu 22.04 host (~64 GiB RAM), running a PoC with
> 32 guest vsock connections advertising 2 GiB each and reading slowly
> drove Slab/SUnreclaim from ~0.5 GiB to ~57 GiB and the system only
> recovered after killing the QEMU process.
> 
> With this patch applied, rerunning the same PoC yields:
> 
>   Before:
>     MemFree:        ~61.6 GiB
>     MemAvailable:   ~62.3 GiB
>     Slab:           ~142 MiB
>     SUnreclaim:     ~117 MiB
> 
>   After 32 high-credit connections:
>     MemFree:        ~61.5 GiB
>     MemAvailable:   ~62.3 GiB
>     Slab:           ~178 MiB
>     SUnreclaim:     ~152 MiB
> 
> i.e. only ~35 MiB increase in Slab/SUnreclaim, no host OOM, and the
> guest remains responsive.
> 

what is missing here, is how do non-virtio transports behave?
because I think we want transports to be compatible.

> Fixes: d021c344051a ("VSOCK: Introduce VM Sockets")

that commit does not even include the patched file.
how can it be the right commit to fix?

> Reported-by: Melbin K Mathew <mlbnkm1@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Melbin K Mathew <mlbnkm1@gmail.com>


this is the fix suggested by Stefano, right?
maybe mention this.

> ---
>  net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
> index dcc8a1d58..f5afedf01 100644
> --- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
> +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
> @@ -491,6 +491,25 @@ void virtio_transport_consume_skb_sent(struct sk_buff *skb, bool consume)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(virtio_transport_consume_skb_sent);
>  
> +/*
> + * Return the effective peer buffer size for TX credit computation.
> + *
> + * The peer advertises its receive buffer via peer_buf_alloc, but we
> + * cap that to our local buf_alloc (derived from
> + * SO_VM_SOCKETS_BUFFER_SIZE and already clamped to buffer_max_size)
> + * so that a remote endpoint cannot force us to queue more data than
> + * our own configuration allows.
> + */
> +static u32 virtio_transport_peer_buf_alloc(struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs)
> +{
> +	u32 peer  = vvs->peer_buf_alloc;
> +	u32 local = vvs->buf_alloc;
> +
> +	if (peer > local)
> +		return local;

> +	return peer;

is this just
 return min(vvs->peer_buf_alloc, vvs->buf_alloc)
?

> +}
> +
>  u32 virtio_transport_get_credit(struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs, u32 credit)
>  {
>  	u32 ret;
> @@ -499,7 +518,8 @@ u32 virtio_transport_get_credit(struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs, u32 credit)
>  		return 0;
>  
>  	spin_lock_bh(&vvs->tx_lock);
> -	ret = vvs->peer_buf_alloc - (vvs->tx_cnt - vvs->peer_fwd_cnt);
> +	ret = virtio_transport_peer_buf_alloc(vvs) -
> +             (vvs->tx_cnt - vvs->peer_fwd_cnt);
>  	if (ret > credit)
>  		ret = credit;
>  	vvs->tx_cnt += ret;
> @@ -831,7 +851,7 @@ virtio_transport_seqpacket_enqueue(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
>  
>  	spin_lock_bh(&vvs->tx_lock);
>  
> -	if (len > vvs->peer_buf_alloc) {
> +	if (len > virtio_transport_peer_buf_alloc(vvs)) {
>  		spin_unlock_bh(&vvs->tx_lock);
>  		return -EMSGSIZE;
>  	}
> @@ -882,7 +902,8 @@ static s64 virtio_transport_has_space(struct vsock_sock *vsk)
>  	struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs = vsk->trans;
>  	s64 bytes;
>  
> -	bytes = (s64)vvs->peer_buf_alloc - (vvs->tx_cnt - vvs->peer_fwd_cnt);
> +	bytes = (s64)virtio_transport_peer_buf_alloc(vvs) -
> +               (vvs->tx_cnt - vvs->peer_fwd_cnt);
>  	if (bytes < 0)
>  		bytes = 0;
>  
> -- 
> 2.34.1

Patchew 2.1-devel-b67e4c2

© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.