linux-kernel - [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.9 20/87] fs: Make splice() and tee() take into account O

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: <20190327182040.17444-20-sashal@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 27 Mar 2019 14:19:33 -0400
From:   Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Slavomir Kaslev <kaslevs@...are.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.9 20/87] fs: Make splice() and tee() take into account O_NONBLOCK flag on pipes

From: Slavomir Kaslev <kaslevs@...are.com>

[ Upstream commit ee5e001196d1345b8fee25925ff5f1d67936081e ]

The current implementation of splice() and tee() ignores O_NONBLOCK set
on pipe file descriptors and checks only the SPLICE_F_NONBLOCK flag for
blocking on pipe arguments.  This is inconsistent since splice()-ing
from/to non-pipe file descriptors does take O_NONBLOCK into
consideration.

Fix this by promoting O_NONBLOCK, when set on a pipe, to
SPLICE_F_NONBLOCK.

Some context for how the current implementation of splice() leads to
inconsistent behavior.  In the ongoing work[1] to add VM tracing
capability to trace-cmd we stream tracing data over named FIFOs or
vsockets from guests back to the host.

When we receive SIGINT from user to stop tracing, we set O_NONBLOCK on
the input file descriptor and set SPLICE_F_NONBLOCK for the next call to
splice().  If splice() was blocked waiting on data from the input FIFO,
after SIGINT splice() restarts with the same arguments (no
SPLICE_F_NONBLOCK) and blocks again instead of returning -EAGAIN when no
data is available.

This differs from the splice() behavior when reading from a vsocket or
when we're doing a traditional read()/write() loop (trace-cmd's
--nosplice argument).

With this patch applied we get the same behavior in all situations after
setting O_NONBLOCK which also matches the behavior of doing a
read()/write() loop instead of splice().

This change does have potential of breaking users who don't expect
EAGAIN from splice() when SPLICE_F_NONBLOCK is not set.  OTOH programs
that set O_NONBLOCK and don't anticipate EAGAIN are arguably buggy[2].

 [1] https://github.com/skaslev/trace-cmd/tree/vsock
 [2] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/d47e3da1759230e394096fd742aad423c291ba48/fs/read_write.c#L1425

Signed-off-by: Slavomir Kaslev <kaslevs@...are.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
---
 fs/splice.c | 12 ++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)

diff --git a/fs/splice.c b/fs/splice.c
index 01983bea760c..3f9e7a724d85 100644
--- a/fs/splice.c
+++ b/fs/splice.c
@@ -1137,6 +1137,9 @@ static long do_splice(struct file *in, loff_t __user *off_in,
 		if (ipipe == opipe)
 			return -EINVAL;

+		if ((in->f_flags | out->f_flags) & O_NONBLOCK)
+			flags |= SPLICE_F_NONBLOCK;
+
 		return splice_pipe_to_pipe(ipipe, opipe, len, flags);
 	}

@@ -1162,6 +1165,9 @@ static long do_splice(struct file *in, loff_t __user *off_in,
 		if (unlikely(ret < 0))
 			return ret;

+		if (in->f_flags & O_NONBLOCK)
+			flags |= SPLICE_F_NONBLOCK;
+
 		file_start_write(out);
 		ret = do_splice_from(ipipe, out, &offset, len, flags);
 		file_end_write(out);
@@ -1186,6 +1192,9 @@ static long do_splice(struct file *in, loff_t __user *off_in,
 			offset = in->f_pos;
 		}

+		if (out->f_flags & O_NONBLOCK)
+			flags |= SPLICE_F_NONBLOCK;
+
 		pipe_lock(opipe);
 		ret = wait_for_space(opipe, flags);
 		if (!ret)
@@ -1718,6 +1727,9 @@ static long do_tee(struct file *in, struct file *out, size_t len,
 	 * copying the data.
 	 */
 	if (ipipe && opipe && ipipe != opipe) {
+		if ((in->f_flags | out->f_flags) & O_NONBLOCK)
+			flags |= SPLICE_F_NONBLOCK;
+
 		/*
 		 * Keep going, unless we encounter an error. The ipipe/opipe
 		 * ordering doesn't really matter.
-- 
2.19.1