linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] vmsplice: unmap gifted pages for recipient

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]

Message-ID: <20131017135417.GC19741@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Thu, 17 Oct 2013 08:54:17 -0500
From:	Robert Jennings <rcj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Matt Helsley <matt.helsley@...il.com>,
	Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>,
	Michael Roth <mdroth@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Lei Li <lilei@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Leonardo Garcia <lagarcia@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] vmsplice: unmap gifted pages for recipient

* Dave Hansen (dave@...1.net) wrote:
> On 10/07/2013 01:21 PM, Robert C Jennings wrote:
> >  		spd.partial[page_nr].offset = loff;
> >  		spd.partial[page_nr].len = this_len;
> > +		spd.partial[page_nr].useraddr = index << PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT;
> >  		len -= this_len;
> >  		loff = 0;
> >  		spd.nr_pages++;
> > @@ -656,6 +702,7 @@ ssize_t default_file_splice_read(struct file *in, loff_t *ppos,
> >  		this_len = min_t(size_t, vec[i].iov_len, res);
> >  		spd.partial[i].offset = 0;
> >  		spd.partial[i].len = this_len;
> > +		spd.partial[i].useraddr = (unsigned long)vec[i].iov_base;
> >  		if (!this_len) {
> >  			__free_page(spd.pages[i]);
> >  			spd.pages[i] = NULL;
> > @@ -1475,6 +1522,8 @@ static int get_iovec_page_array(const struct iovec __user *iov,
> >  
> >  			partial[buffers].offset = off;
> >  			partial[buffers].len = plen;
> > +			partial[buffers].useraddr = (unsigned long)base;
> > +			base = (void*)((unsigned long)base + PAGE_SIZE);
> >  
> >  			off = 0;
> >  			len -= plen;
> > diff --git a/include/linux/splice.h b/include/linux/splice.h
> > index 74575cb..56661e3 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/splice.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/splice.h
> > @@ -44,6 +44,7 @@ struct partial_page {
> >  	unsigned int offset;
> >  	unsigned int len;
> >  	unsigned long private;
> > +	unsigned long useraddr;
> >  };
> 
> "useraddr" confuses me.  You make it an 'unsigned long', yet two of the
> three assignments are from "void __user *".  The other assignment:
> 
> 	spd.partial[page_nr].useraddr = index << PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT;
> 
> 'index' looks to be the offset inside the file, not a user address, so
> I'm confused what that is doing.
> 
> Could you elaborate a little more on why 'useraddr' is suddenly needed
> in these patches?  How is "index << PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT" a virtual address?
>  Also, are we losing any of the advantages of sparse checking since
> 'useraddr' is without the __user annotation?
> 

I'm working on cleaning this up.  Trying to remove useraddr altogher
through the use of the existing 'private' field just for the
splice_to_user/pipe_to_user flow without upsetting other uses of the
private field.

--
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/