[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <201905170938.99AACF0D@keescook>
Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 09:40:31 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc: 'Jan Kara' <jack@...e.cz>, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Jeff Smits <jeff.smits@...el.com>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libnvdimm/pmem: Bypass CONFIG_HARDENED_USERCOPY overhead
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 04:14:03PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> From: Kees Cook
> > Sent: 17 May 2019 16:54
> ...
> > > I've changed some of our code to use __get_user() to avoid
> > > these stupid overheads.
> >
> > __get_user() skips even access_ok() checking too, so that doesn't seem
> > like a good idea. Did you run access_ok() checks separately? (This
> > generally isn't recommended.)
>
> Of course, I'm not THAT stupid :-)
Right, yes, I know. :) I just wanted to double-check since accidents
can happen. The number of underscores on these function is not really
a great way to indicate what they're doing. ;)
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists