On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 12:52 PM Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 4/22/25 15:03, Mina Almasry wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 1:16 AM Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On 4/18/25 00:15, Mina Almasry wrote: > >>> Later patches in the series adds TX net_iovs where there is no pp > >>> associated, so we can't rely on niov->pp->mp_ops to tell what is the > >>> type of the net_iov. > >> > >> That's fine, but that needs a NULL pp check in io_uring as well, > >> specifically in io_zcrx_recv_frag(). > >> > > > > I think you mean this update in the code: > > > > if (!niov->pp || niov->pp->mp_ops != &io_uring_pp_zc_ops || > > io_pp_to_ifq(niov->pp) != ifq) > > return -EFAULT; > > > > Yes, thanks, will do. > > That will work. I'm assuming that those pp-less niovs can > end up in the rx path. I think it was deemed not impossible, > right? > I'm not sure these pp-less niovs can ever end up in the RX path, but I'm not sure, and I guess better safe than sorry. We usually get yelled at for defensive checks but I don't think this one is too defensive. There could be a path where a TX skb somehow ends up here. -- Thanks, Mina
