[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F92BE52.4020908@symas.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 07:04:02 -0700
From: Howard Chu <hyc@...as.com>
To: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
CC: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Emil Goode <emilgoode@...il.com>, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/tty: Use get_user instead of dereferencing user
pointer
Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 04/20/2012 11:00 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
>> It's not simple however, so can anyone work out or remember wtf the code
>> should be doing ???
>
> Huh.
>
> The code was added by:
> commit 26df6d13406d1a53b0bda08bd712f1924affd7cd
> Author: hyc@...as.com<hyc@...as.com>
> Date: Tue Jun 22 10:14:49 2010 -0700
>
> tty: Add EXTPROC support for LINEMODE
>
> ====
>
> The code is now:
>
> retval = copy_to_user(*b,&tty->read_buf[tty->read_tail], n);
> n -= retval;
> tty_audit_add_data(tty,&tty->read_buf[tty->read_tail], n);
> spin_lock_irqsave(&tty->read_lock, flags);
> tty->read_tail = (tty->read_tail + n)& (N_TTY_BUF_SIZE-1);
> tty->read_cnt -= n;
> if (L_EXTPROC(tty)&& tty->icanon&& n == 1) {
> if (!tty->read_cnt&& (*b)[n-1] == EOF_CHAR(tty))
> n--;
> }
>
> ====
>
> n after "n -= retval" means number of successfully copied chars. So the
> test "n == 1" along with "!tty->read_cnt" actually should ensure we
> copied everything and that is exactly one char. Further we test if that
> one is EOF. If so, ignore that char by pretending we copied nothing.
Correct.
> However the implementation does not count with buffer wrapped like:
> EOF..........................something
> ^----- tail
>
> Here, the first call to copy_from_read_buf copies "something" and the
> second one is to copy single EOF. But that would be ignored! Is this
> expected?
Hmmm, probably not expected, no. The intent was to pass the EOF character
through if it's part of a non-empty input line. But if the EOF is the first
character on an input line, it should be treated as an EOF and no data
returned from the read.
> So to fix the user buffer dereference, the following diff should help.
> In any case the wrapped buffer is still to be fixed... (Or ignored.)
> --- a/drivers/tty/n_tty.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/n_tty.c
> @@ -1630,6 +1630,7 @@ static int copy_from_read_buf(struct tty_struct *tty,
> int retval;
> size_t n;
> unsigned long flags;
> + bool is_eof;
>
> retval = 0;
> spin_lock_irqsave(&tty->read_lock, flags);
> @@ -1639,15 +1640,15 @@ static int copy_from_read_buf(struct tty_struct
> *tty,
> if (n) {
> retval = copy_to_user(*b,
> &tty->read_buf[tty->read_tail], n);
> n -= retval;
> + is_eof = n == 1&&
> + tty->read_buf[tty->read_tail] == EOF_CHAR(tty);
> tty_audit_add_data(tty,&tty->read_buf[tty->read_tail], n);
> spin_lock_irqsave(&tty->read_lock, flags);
> tty->read_tail = (tty->read_tail + n)& (N_TTY_BUF_SIZE-1);
> tty->read_cnt -= n;
> /* Turn single EOF into zero-length read */
> - if (L_EXTPROC(tty)&& tty->icanon&& n == 1) {
> - if (!tty->read_cnt&& (*b)[n-1] == EOF_CHAR(tty))
> - n--;
> - }
> + if (L_EXTPROC(tty)&& tty->icanon&& is_eof&&
> !tty->read_cnt)
> + n = 0;
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&tty->read_lock, flags);
> *b += n;
> *nr -= n;
>
> thanks,
--
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists