Re: [Qemu-stable] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] walk_pml4e(): fix abort on bad PML4E/PDPTE/PDE/PTE addresses

[Laszlo Ersek]

On 05/30/13 14:59, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2013 14:19:22 -0400
> Luiz Capitulino <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
>> The code used to walk IA-32e page-tables, and possibly PAE page-tables,
>> uses the bit mask ~0xfff to get the next PML4E/PDPTE/PDE/PTE address.
>>
>> However, as we use a uint64_t to store the resulting address, that mask
>> gets expanded to 0xfffffffffffff000 which not only ends up selecting
>> reserved bits but also selects the XD bit (execute-disable) which
>> happens to be enabled by Windows 8, causing qemu_get_ram_ptr() to abort.
>>
>> This commit fixes that problem by replacing ~0xfff by a correct mask
>> that only selects the address bit range (ie. bits 51:12).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Luiz Capitulino <address@hidden>
> 
> Ping? Wen?
> 
> Would be nice get a Reviewed-by before merging...

I didn't miss your submission and did find it OK, I just felt unsure
about stating so, because "simple" patches like this are prime territory
to burn someone's R-b's worth (ie. to expose a reviewer's lack of
information / experience). But hey, what can I lose? The patch does look
good to me, so

Reviewed-by: Laszlo Ersek <address@hidden>

> 
>> ---
>>
>> PS: I (obviously) don't any more core dumps with this patch applied, but
>>     I couldn't check if the Windows dump is correct (does anyone know
>>     how to do this?). I did quickly check on Linux though.
>>
>>  target-i386/arch_memory_mapping.c | 10 ++++++----
>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/target-i386/arch_memory_mapping.c 
>> b/target-i386/arch_memory_mapping.c
>> index 844893f..24884bd 100644
>> --- a/target-i386/arch_memory_mapping.c
>> +++ b/target-i386/arch_memory_mapping.c
>> @@ -75,6 +75,8 @@ static void walk_pte2(MemoryMappingList *list,
>>  }
>>  
>>  /* PAE Paging or IA-32e Paging */
>> +#define PLM4_ADDR_MASK 0xffffffffff000 /* selects bits 51:12 */
>> +
>>  static void walk_pde(MemoryMappingList *list, hwaddr pde_start_addr,
>>                       int32_t a20_mask, target_ulong start_line_addr)
>>  {
>> @@ -105,7 +107,7 @@ static void walk_pde(MemoryMappingList *list, hwaddr 
>> pde_start_addr,
>>              continue;
>>          }
>>  
>> -        pte_start_addr = (pde & ~0xfff) & a20_mask;
>> +        pte_start_addr = (pde & PLM4_ADDR_MASK) & a20_mask;
>>          walk_pte(list, pte_start_addr, a20_mask, line_addr);
>>      }
>>  }
>> @@ -208,7 +210,7 @@ static void walk_pdpe(MemoryMappingList *list,
>>              continue;
>>          }
>>  
>> -        pde_start_addr = (pdpe & ~0xfff) & a20_mask;
>> +        pde_start_addr = (pdpe & PLM4_ADDR_MASK) & a20_mask;
>>          walk_pde(list, pde_start_addr, a20_mask, line_addr);
>>      }
>>  }
>> @@ -231,7 +233,7 @@ static void walk_pml4e(MemoryMappingList *list,
>>          }
>>  
>>          line_addr = ((i & 0x1ffULL) << 39) | (0xffffULL << 48);
>> -        pdpe_start_addr = (pml4e & ~0xfff) & a20_mask;
>> +        pdpe_start_addr = (pml4e & PLM4_ADDR_MASK) & a20_mask;
>>          walk_pdpe(list, pdpe_start_addr, a20_mask, line_addr);
>>      }
>>  }
>> @@ -249,7 +251,7 @@ int cpu_get_memory_mapping(MemoryMappingList *list, 
>> CPUArchState *env)
>>          if (env->hflags & HF_LMA_MASK) {
>>              hwaddr pml4e_addr;
>>  
>> -            pml4e_addr = (env->cr[3] & ~0xfff) & env->a20_mask;
>> +            pml4e_addr = (env->cr[3] & PLM4_ADDR_MASK) & env->a20_mask;
>>              walk_pml4e(list, pml4e_addr, env->a20_mask);
>>          } else
>>  #endif
> 
>