[PATCH] common/mlx5: fix overlapping memory ranges

Stephen Hemminger stephen at networkplumber.org
Wed Sep 23 17:38:55 CEST 2026


On Mon, 3 Aug 2026 12:18:50 +0300
Raslan Darawsheh <rasland at nvidia.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> 
> On 21/07/2026 3:13 PM, Viacheslav Ovsiienko wrote:
> > The mlx5 driver requires special objects named Memory Regions
> > (MR) to perform DMA operations with network data. The memory
> > pool(s) is used to provide memory and to cover pool addresses
> > the mlx5 PMD -pre-creates the appropriate MRs on Rx queue creation.
> > 
> > The pool memory can be non-contigous and split into segments.
> > The PMD created MRs on the page alignment segment boundaries
> > and it could cause the overlapping MRs (in case if the end
> > address of one segmend is aligned to ceiling and the next
> > segment start address is aligned to the floor).
> > 
> > The MRs overlapping could cause the wrong MR fetching from the
> > cache for the mbufs in the overlapping area if the starting
> > mbuf address falls into overlapped area and raise the
> > hardware memory protection exception.
> > 
> > Fixes: 690b2a88c2f7 ("common/mlx5: add mempool registration facilities")
> > Cc: stable at dpdk.org
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo at nvidia.com>
> > Acked-by: Dariusz Sosnowski <dsosnowski at nvidia.com>  
> 
> Patch applied to next-net-mlx,
> 
> Kindest regards
> Raslan Darawsheh
> 

More detailed AI review found problems with this patch.

 Finding: f718141d6c "common/mlx5: fix overlapping memory ranges" — incomplete fix

  The change from != to < correctly merges the page-alignment overlap case
  (chunks[i-1].end > chunks[i].start). But the merge body still propagates the
  previous chunk's end rather than the maximum end seen so far:

  for (i = 1; i < chunks_n; i++)
      if (chunks[i - 1].end < chunks[i].start) {
          chunks[contig_n - 1].end = chunks[i - 1].end;   /* mlx5_common_mr.c:1507 
  */

  That is only safe if ends are monotonically non-decreasing after the sort.
  mlx5_range_compare_start (mlx5_common_mr.c:1351) compares start only, and qsort
  is not stable — so two ranges with equal starts but different ends can sort in
  either order. Equal starts are reachable on the regular-chunk path:
  mlx5_range_from_mempool_chunk (:1372) floors the start to a page, so two raw
  mempool chunks in the same page both yield start = P, while their ends ceil to
  different pages.

  Concretely, for raw chunks producing [P, P+2pg] and [P, P+pg] sorted in that
  order, the merge yields a final end of P+pg — the last pg of registered memory is
  dropped, which is the same class of MR-coverage bug the commit sets out to fix,
  just in the opposite direction (under-coverage rather than overlap).

  The extmem path is unaffected: mlx5_mempool_get_extmem_cb (:1447) emits uniform
  single-page segments, so equal starts imply equal ends there.

  Suggested fix — track the running maximum:

  chunks[contig_n - 1].end = RTE_MAX(chunks[contig_n - 1].end, chunks[i - 1].end);

  applied at both the in-loop assignment and the post-loop "extend the last chunk"
  line. Alternatively, extend the comparator to break ties on descending end, which
  restores the monotonicity the current code assumes.


More information about the stable mailing list