lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:16:11 -0400
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com>
Cc: Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
	Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
	Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v5 2/2] net: add netmem to skb_frag_t

On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 07:04:13PM +0800, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
> On 2024/1/16 8:01, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 03:23:33PM -0800, Mina Almasry wrote:
> >>>> You did not answer my question that I asked here, and ignoring this
> >>>> question is preventing us from making any forward progress on this
> >>>> discussion. What do you expect or want skb_frag_page() to do when
> >>>> there is no page in the frag?
> >>>
> >>> I would expect it to do nothing.
> >>
> >> I don't understand. skb_frag_page() with an empty implementation just
> >> results in a compiler error as the function needs to return a page
> >> pointer. Do you actually expect skb_frag_page() to unconditionally
> >> cast frag->netmem to a page pointer? That was explained as
> >> unacceptable over and over again by Jason and Christian as it risks
> >> casting devmem to page; completely unacceptable and will get nacked.
> >> Do you have a suggestion of what skb_frag_page() should do that will
> >> not get nacked by mm?
> > 
> > WARN_ON and return NULL seems reasonable?
> 
> While I am agreed that it may be a nightmare to debug the case of passing
> a false page into the mm system, but I am not sure what's the point of
> returning NULL to caller if the caller is not expecting or handling
> the

You have to return something and NULL will largely reliably crash the
thread. The WARN_ON explains in detail why your thread just crashed.

> NULL returning[for example, most of mm API called by the networking does not
> seems to handling NULL as input page], isn't the NULL returning will make
> the kernel panic anyway? Doesn't it make more sense to just add a BUG_ON()
> depending on some configuration like CONFIG_DEBUG_NET or CONFIG_DEVMEM?
> As returning NULL seems to be causing a confusion for the caller of
> skb_frag_page() as whether to or how to handle the NULL returning case.

Possibly, though Linus doesn't like BUG_ON on principle..

I think the bigger challenge is convincing people that this devmem
stuff doesn't just open a bunch of holes in the kernel where userspace
can crash it.

The fact you all are debating what to do with skb_frag_page() suggests
to me there isn't confidence...

Jason

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ