diff options
author | Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com> | 2014-04-29 19:03:14 +0200 |
---|---|---|
committer | Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> | 2014-04-30 14:46:17 +0200 |
commit | b93f995081cc32e56071fef179161d2907d0491e (patch) | |
tree | c4a4a5ab3111109055ffac05634c2d298b44b4e9 /block/qcow2-cluster.c | |
parent | a49139af77850d64d74f9ffe43cabe7aa4f19de0 (diff) | |
download | qemu-b93f995081cc32e56071fef179161d2907d0491e.zip qemu-b93f995081cc32e56071fef179161d2907d0491e.tar.gz qemu-b93f995081cc32e56071fef179161d2907d0491e.tar.bz2 |
qcow2: Check min_size in qcow2_grow_l1_table()
First, new_l1_size is an int64_t, whereas min_size is a uint64_t.
Therefore, during the loop which adjusts new_l1_size until it equals or
exceeds min_size, new_l1_size might overflow and become negative. The
comparison in the loop condition however will take it as an unsigned
value (because min_size is unsigned) and therefore recognize it as
exceeding min_size. Therefore, the loop is left with a negative
new_l1_size, which is not correct. This could be fixed by making
new_l1_size uint64_t.
On the other hand, however, by doing this, the while loop may take
forever. If min_size is e.g. UINT64_MAX, it will take new_l1_size
probably multiple overflows to reach the exact same value (if it reaches
it at all). Then, right after the loop, new_l1_size will be recognized
as being too big anyway.
Both problems require a ridiculously high min_size value, which is very
unlikely to occur; but both problems are also simply avoided by checking
whether min_size is sane before calculating new_l1_size (which should
still be checked separately, though).
Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'block/qcow2-cluster.c')
-rw-r--r-- | block/qcow2-cluster.c | 7 |
1 files changed, 7 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/block/qcow2-cluster.c b/block/qcow2-cluster.c index b746429..76d2bcf 100644 --- a/block/qcow2-cluster.c +++ b/block/qcow2-cluster.c @@ -42,6 +42,13 @@ int qcow2_grow_l1_table(BlockDriverState *bs, uint64_t min_size, if (min_size <= s->l1_size) return 0; + /* Do a sanity check on min_size before trying to calculate new_l1_size + * (this prevents overflows during the while loop for the calculation of + * new_l1_size) */ + if (min_size > INT_MAX / sizeof(uint64_t)) { + return -EFBIG; + } + if (exact_size) { new_l1_size = min_size; } else { |