Hello,
It seems that there are invalid page MMIO write access in i40e_clear_hw()
due to an integer underflow from num_pf_int(also num_vf_int seems possible).
The following is a sample code in i40e_clear_hw():
val = rd32(hw, I40E_GLPCI_CNF2); // (1)
num_pf_int = FIELD_GET(I40E_GLPCI_CNF2_MSI_X_PF_N_MASK, val); // (2)
num_vf_int = FIELD_GET(I40E_GLPCI_CNF2_MSI_X_VF_N_MASK, val);
...
for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++) // (3)
wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN(i), val); // (4)
...
for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++) // (5)
wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
...
for (i = 0; i < num_vf_int - 2; i++) // (6)
wr32(hw, I40E_VPINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
An example scenario for num_pf_int:
(1) val = 0 (if MMIO read value was 0)
(2) num_pf_int = 0 (also zero after bit field extraction from val)
(3) An integer underflow occurs (num_pf_int - 2 == 0xfffffffe)
(4) Out-of-bounds MMIO write access if access address exceeds the expected
range.
From above example scenario, the maximum access offset value can be around
0x4000347f8(=172G) which seems like this underflow is not intended(also there
are masking operations like (2) for num_pf_int), so I report this issue.
I think similar issue also could happen at (5) and (6).
The following is the patch method I propose:
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
index 370b4bddee44..97ef79be39b3 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
@@ -848,19 +848,25 @@ void i40e_clear_hw(struct i40e_hw *hw)
/* stop all the interrupts */
wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_ICR0_ENA, 0);
val = 0x3 << I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN_ITR_INDX_SHIFT;
- for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++)
- wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN(i), val);
+ if (num_pf_int > 1) {
+ for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++)
+ wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN(i), val);
+ }
/* Set the FIRSTQ_INDX field to 0x7FF in PFINT_LNKLSTx */
val = eol << I40E_PFINT_LNKLST0_FIRSTQ_INDX_SHIFT;
wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_LNKLST0, val);
- for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++)
- wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
+ if (num_pf_int > 1) {
+ for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++)
+ wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
+ }
val = eol << I40E_VPINT_LNKLST0_FIRSTQ_INDX_SHIFT;
for (i = 0; i < num_vfs; i++)
wr32(hw, I40E_VPINT_LNKLST0(i), val);
- for (i = 0; i < num_vf_int - 2; i++)
- wr32(hw, I40E_VPINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
+ if (num_vf_int > 1) {
+ for (i = 0; i < num_vf_int - 2; i++)
+ wr32(hw, I40E_VPINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
+ }
/* warn the HW of the coming Tx disables */
for (i = 0; i < num_queues; i++) {
Could you check this?
Best regards,
Kyungwook Boo
On 3/3/25 11:19, Kyungwook Boo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> It seems that there are invalid page MMIO write access in i40e_clear_hw()
Hi,
is this something that actually occurred, or just a theoretical bug?
(depending on that we will apply it to different tree)
please send a proper patch anyway, as it looks legit to don't go bananas
when HW gives you 0
(and CC netdev instead of generic kernel ML, perhaps that's the reason
this mail was tagged as spam for me)
> due to an integer underflow from num_pf_int(also num_vf_int seems possible).
>
> The following is a sample code in i40e_clear_hw():
>
> val = rd32(hw, I40E_GLPCI_CNF2); // (1)
> num_pf_int = FIELD_GET(I40E_GLPCI_CNF2_MSI_X_PF_N_MASK, val); // (2)
> num_vf_int = FIELD_GET(I40E_GLPCI_CNF2_MSI_X_VF_N_MASK, val);
> ...
> for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++) // (3)
> wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN(i), val); // (4)
> ...
> for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++) // (5)
> wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
> ...
> for (i = 0; i < num_vf_int - 2; i++) // (6)
> wr32(hw, I40E_VPINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
>
> An example scenario for num_pf_int:
> (1) val = 0 (if MMIO read value was 0)
> (2) num_pf_int = 0 (also zero after bit field extraction from val)
> (3) An integer underflow occurs (num_pf_int - 2 == 0xfffffffe)
> (4) Out-of-bounds MMIO write access if access address exceeds the expected
> range.
>
> From above example scenario, the maximum access offset value can be around
> 0x4000347f8(=172G) which seems like this underflow is not intended(also there
> are masking operations like (2) for num_pf_int), so I report this issue.
>
> I think similar issue also could happen at (5) and (6).
>
> The following is the patch method I propose:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
> index 370b4bddee44..97ef79be39b3 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
> @@ -848,19 +848,25 @@ void i40e_clear_hw(struct i40e_hw *hw)
> /* stop all the interrupts */
> wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_ICR0_ENA, 0);
> val = 0x3 << I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN_ITR_INDX_SHIFT;
> - for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++)
> - wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN(i), val);
> + if (num_pf_int > 1) {
instead of adding if conditions, I would simply change the type
to be signed
> + for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++)
> + wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN(i), val);
> + }
>
> /* Set the FIRSTQ_INDX field to 0x7FF in PFINT_LNKLSTx */
> val = eol << I40E_PFINT_LNKLST0_FIRSTQ_INDX_SHIFT;
> wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_LNKLST0, val);
> - for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++)
> - wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
> + if (num_pf_int > 1) {
> + for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++)
> + wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
> + }
> val = eol << I40E_VPINT_LNKLST0_FIRSTQ_INDX_SHIFT;
> for (i = 0; i < num_vfs; i++)
> wr32(hw, I40E_VPINT_LNKLST0(i), val);
> - for (i = 0; i < num_vf_int - 2; i++)
> - wr32(hw, I40E_VPINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
> + if (num_vf_int > 1) {
> + for (i = 0; i < num_vf_int - 2; i++)
> + wr32(hw, I40E_VPINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
> + }
>
> /* warn the HW of the coming Tx disables */
> for (i = 0; i < num_queues; i++) {
>
>
> Could you check this?
>
> Best regards,
> Kyungwook Boo
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan-bounces@osuosl.org> On Behalf Of
> Przemek Kitszel
> Sent: Wednesday, March 5, 2025 11:27 AM
> To: Kyungwook Boo <bookyungwook@gmail.com>
> Cc: intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Nguyen,
> Anthony L <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] MMIO write access to an invalid page in
> i40e_clear_hw()
>
> On 3/3/25 11:19, Kyungwook Boo wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > It seems that there are invalid page MMIO write access in
> > i40e_clear_hw()
>
> Hi,
>
> is this something that actually occurred, or just a theoretical bug?
> (depending on that we will apply it to different tree)
>
> please send a proper patch anyway, as it looks legit to don't go bananas when
> HW gives you 0
>
> (and CC netdev instead of generic kernel ML, perhaps that's the reason this
> mail was tagged as spam for me)
>
> > due to an integer underflow from num_pf_int(also num_vf_int seems
> possible).
> >
> > The following is a sample code in i40e_clear_hw():
> >
> > val = rd32(hw, I40E_GLPCI_CNF2); // (1) num_pf_int =
> > FIELD_GET(I40E_GLPCI_CNF2_MSI_X_PF_N_MASK, val); // (2) num_vf_int =
> > FIELD_GET(I40E_GLPCI_CNF2_MSI_X_VF_N_MASK, val); ...
> > for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++) // (3)
> > wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN(i), val); // (4) ...
> > for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++) // (5)
> > wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_LNKLSTN(i), val); ...
> > for (i = 0; i < num_vf_int - 2; i++) // (6)
> > wr32(hw, I40E_VPINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
> >
> > An example scenario for num_pf_int:
> > (1) val = 0 (if MMIO read value was 0)
> > (2) num_pf_int = 0 (also zero after bit field extraction from val)
> > (3) An integer underflow occurs (num_pf_int - 2 == 0xfffffffe)
> > (4) Out-of-bounds MMIO write access if access address exceeds the
> > expected range.
> >
> > From above example scenario, the maximum access offset value can be
> > around
> > 0x4000347f8(=172G) which seems like this underflow is not
> > intended(also there are masking operations like (2) for num_pf_int), so I
> report this issue.
> >
> > I think similar issue also could happen at (5) and (6).
> >
> > The following is the patch method I propose:
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
> > b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
> > index 370b4bddee44..97ef79be39b3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
> > @@ -848,19 +848,25 @@ void i40e_clear_hw(struct i40e_hw *hw)
> > /* stop all the interrupts */
> > wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_ICR0_ENA, 0);
> > val = 0x3 << I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN_ITR_INDX_SHIFT;
> > - for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++)
> > - wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN(i), val);
> > + if (num_pf_int > 1) {
>
> instead of adding if conditions, I would simply change the type to be signed
Agree, but don't forget to make I signed too!
> > + for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++)
> > + wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN(i), val);
> > + }
> >
> > /* Set the FIRSTQ_INDX field to 0x7FF in PFINT_LNKLSTx */
> > val = eol << I40E_PFINT_LNKLST0_FIRSTQ_INDX_SHIFT;
> > wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_LNKLST0, val);
> > - for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++)
> > - wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
> > + if (num_pf_int > 1) {
> > + for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++)
> > + wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
> > + }
> > val = eol << I40E_VPINT_LNKLST0_FIRSTQ_INDX_SHIFT;
> > for (i = 0; i < num_vfs; i++)
> > wr32(hw, I40E_VPINT_LNKLST0(i), val);
> > - for (i = 0; i < num_vf_int - 2; i++)
> > - wr32(hw, I40E_VPINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
> > + if (num_vf_int > 1) {
> > + for (i = 0; i < num_vf_int - 2; i++)
> > + wr32(hw, I40E_VPINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
> > + }
> >
> > /* warn the HW of the coming Tx disables */
> > for (i = 0; i < num_queues; i++) {
> >
> >
> > Could you check this?
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Kyungwook Boo
On 25. 3. 5. 21:11, Loktionov, Aleksandr wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan-bounces@osuosl.org> On Behalf Of
>> Przemek Kitszel
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 5, 2025 11:27 AM
>> To: Kyungwook Boo <bookyungwook@gmail.com>
>> Cc: intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Nguyen,
>> Anthony L <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] MMIO write access to an invalid page in
>> i40e_clear_hw()
>>
>> On 3/3/25 11:19, Kyungwook Boo wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> It seems that there are invalid page MMIO write access in
>>> i40e_clear_hw()
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> is this something that actually occurred, or just a theoretical bug?
>> (depending on that we will apply it to different tree)
>>
>> please send a proper patch anyway, as it looks legit to don't go bananas when
>> HW gives you 0
>>
>> (and CC netdev instead of generic kernel ML, perhaps that's the reason this
>> mail was tagged as spam for me)
Hi,
thank you for your response.
If you’re asking whether this happened on a physical device, it did not, but it
is something that can be triggered through virtual device with fuzzed input.
Also, I'll follow your guidance when sending the proper patch.
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
>>> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
>>> index 370b4bddee44..97ef79be39b3 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
>>> @@ -848,19 +848,25 @@ void i40e_clear_hw(struct i40e_hw *hw)
>>> /* stop all the interrupts */
>>> wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_ICR0_ENA, 0);
>>> val = 0x3 << I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN_ITR_INDX_SHIFT;
>>> - for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++)
>>> - wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN(i), val);
>>> + if (num_pf_int > 1) {
>>
>> instead of adding if conditions, I would simply change the type to be signed
I’ll incorporate the suggested approach when sending the patch.
Best,
Kyungwook Boo
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan-bounces@osuosl.org> On Behalf Of
> Kyungwook Boo
> Sent: Monday, March 3, 2025 11:20 AM
> To: Nguyen, Anthony L <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>; Kitszel, Przemyslaw
> <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>
> Cc: intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] MMIO write access to an invalid page in
> i40e_clear_hw()
>
Please start commit title with 'fix' to explicitly tell what your patch do i.e. :
Ice: fix MMIO write access to an invalid page in i40e_clear_hw
> Hello,
>
> It seems that there are invalid page MMIO write access in i40e_clear_hw() due
> to an integer underflow from num_pf_int(also num_vf_int seems possible).
>
> The following is a sample code in i40e_clear_hw():
>
> val = rd32(hw, I40E_GLPCI_CNF2); // (1)
> num_pf_int = FIELD_GET(I40E_GLPCI_CNF2_MSI_X_PF_N_MASK, val); // (2)
> num_vf_int = FIELD_GET(I40E_GLPCI_CNF2_MSI_X_VF_N_MASK, val); ...
> for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++) // (3)
> wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN(i), val); // (4) ...
> for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++) // (5)
> wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
> ...
> for (i = 0; i < num_vf_int - 2; i++) // (6)
> wr32(hw, I40E_VPINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
>
> An example scenario for num_pf_int:
> (1) val = 0 (if MMIO read value was 0)
> (2) num_pf_int = 0 (also zero after bit field extraction from val)
> (3) An integer underflow occurs (num_pf_int - 2 == 0xfffffffe)
> (4) Out-of-bounds MMIO write access if access address exceeds the expected
> range.
>
> From above example scenario, the maximum access offset value can be
> around
> 0x4000347f8(=172G) which seems like this underflow is not intended(also
> there are masking operations like (2) for num_pf_int), so I report this issue.
>
> I think similar issue also could happen at (5) and (6).
>
> The following is the patch method I propose:
>
Please add Fixes: tag https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
> index 370b4bddee44..97ef79be39b3 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c
> @@ -848,19 +848,25 @@ void i40e_clear_hw(struct i40e_hw *hw)
> /* stop all the interrupts */
> wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_ICR0_ENA, 0);
> val = 0x3 << I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN_ITR_INDX_SHIFT;
> - for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++)
> - wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN(i), val);
> + if (num_pf_int > 1) {
> + for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++)
> + wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_DYN_CTLN(i), val);
> + }
>
> /* Set the FIRSTQ_INDX field to 0x7FF in PFINT_LNKLSTx */
> val = eol << I40E_PFINT_LNKLST0_FIRSTQ_INDX_SHIFT;
> wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_LNKLST0, val);
> - for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++)
> - wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
> + if (num_pf_int > 1) {
> + for (i = 0; i < num_pf_int - 2; i++)
> + wr32(hw, I40E_PFINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
> + }
Can you consider moving this if upper and use it once instead of duplicating the code?
I think it can help to maintain the code. What do you think?
> val = eol << I40E_VPINT_LNKLST0_FIRSTQ_INDX_SHIFT;
> for (i = 0; i < num_vfs; i++)
> wr32(hw, I40E_VPINT_LNKLST0(i), val);
> - for (i = 0; i < num_vf_int - 2; i++)
> - wr32(hw, I40E_VPINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
> + if (num_vf_int > 1) {
> + for (i = 0; i < num_vf_int - 2; i++)
> + wr32(hw, I40E_VPINT_LNKLSTN(i), val);
> + }
>
> /* warn the HW of the coming Tx disables */
> for (i = 0; i < num_queues; i++) {
>
>
> Could you check this?
>
> Best regards,
> Kyungwook Boo
On 25. 3. 5. 19:13, Loktionov, Aleksandr wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan-bounces@osuosl.org> On Behalf Of >> Kyungwook Boo >> Sent: Monday, March 3, 2025 11:20 AM >> To: Nguyen, Anthony L <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>; Kitszel, Przemyslaw >> <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com> >> Cc: intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] MMIO write access to an invalid page in >> i40e_clear_hw() >> > Please start commit title with 'fix' to explicitly tell what your patch do i.e. : > Ice: fix MMIO write access to an invalid page in i40e_clear_hw > > Please add Fixes: tag https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html Thanks for the guidance. I'll follow your advice and send the patch accordingly. I'll also read the linked documentation and will try the patch is properly formatted.
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.