[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170619204637.GJ10672@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 21:46:37 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com>
Cc: linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: __user with scalar data types
On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 10:32:18PM +0200, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 10:15:09AM -0600, Jordan Crouse wrote:
> > struct uapistruct {
> > ...
> > __u64 __user myptr;
> > ---
> > };
> >
> > And then converting it for use in the kernel as such:
> >
> > {
> > void __user *userptr = (void __user *)(uintptr_t)args->myptr;
> >
> > copy_from_user(local, userptr, size);
> > ...
> > }
> >
> > The problem is that sparse doesn't like the momentary switch to
> > uintptr_t:
> >
> > warning: dereference of noderef expression
>
> This warning doesn't come from the cast to uintptr_t but
> simply from dereferencing the field which can't be dereferenced
> since it's marked as '__user'. In other words, doing
> 'args->myptr' rightfully trigger the warning and no cast
> will or should stop that.
>
> Also, you can't expect the '__user' to be transmitted from
> 'myptr' to the pointer (without taking the address of 'myptr').
> It's exactly like 'const int' vs. 'const int *': the '__user' or
> the 'const' is not at the same level in the type hierarchy
> ('const object' vs. 'non-const pointer to const object').
Besides, suppose you add a special type for that. How would it
have to behave, really? AFAICS, you want something similar to
__bitwise, except that (assuming this type is T)
T + integer => T
T - integer => T
T & integer => integer
T | integer => T
T - T => integer (quietly decay to underlying type for both
arguments, then treat as normal -)
T & T => T (probably, but might be worth a warning)
T | T => T (ditto)
comparison - same as for __bitwise
constant conversion: 0 should convert clean, anything else - a warning
cast to pointer => warn unless the target type is __user? But that's
not going to help with cast through uintptr_t...
?: as usual
any other arithmetics => warn and decay to underlying integer type
It might be not impossible to implement, but it sure as hell won't be __user
and it'll need careful thinking about the semantics of those annotations.
The outline above is just that - figuring out if there are any nasty corner
cases will take some work.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists