linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 15/17] x86, mpx: do 32-bit-only cmpxchg for 32-bit apps

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: <55159E89.5090007@sr71.net>
Date:	Fri, 27 Mar 2015 11:16:41 -0700
From:	Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/17] x86, mpx: do 32-bit-only cmpxchg for 32-bit apps

On 03/27/2015 10:29 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> > +static int mpx_cmpxchg_bd_entry(struct mm_struct *mm,
>> > +		unsigned long *actual_old_val_ptr, long __user *bd_entry_addr,
>> > +		unsigned long expected_old_val, unsigned long new_bd_entry)
>> > +{
>> > +	int ret;
>> > +	/*
>> > +	 * user_atomic_cmpxchg_inatomic() actually uses sizeof()
>> > +	 * the pointer thatt we pass to it to figure out how much
>> > +	 * data to cmpxchg.  We have to be careful here not to
>> > +	 * pass a pointer to a 64-bit data type when we only want
>> > +	 * a 32-bit copy.
>> > +	 */
>> > +	if (is_64bit_mm(mm)) {
>> > +		ret = user_atomic_cmpxchg_inatomic(actual_old_val_ptr,
>> > +				bd_entry_addr, expected_old_val, new_bd_entry);
>> > +	} else {
>> > +		u32 uninitialized_var(actual_old_val_32);
>> > +		u32 expected_old_val_32 = expected_old_val;
>> > +		u32 new_bd_entry_32 = new_bd_entry;
>> > +		u32 __user *bd_entry_32 = (u32 __user *)bd_entry_addr;
>> > +		ret = user_atomic_cmpxchg_inatomic(&actual_old_val_32,
>> > +				bd_entry_32, expected_old_val_32,
>> > +				new_bd_entry_32);
> Hmm, I would've added a user_atomic_cmpxchg_inatomic_size() macro which
> calls __user_atomic_cmpxchg_inatomic().

That would have saved creating 'u32 __user *bd_entry_32' so that we
could implicitly do sizeof(*bd_entry_32).  But, what else does it buy us?
--
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/