linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] arch: wire-up clone3() syscall

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190621153012.fxwhx25mzmzueqh7@brauner.io>
Date:   Fri, 21 Jun 2019 17:30:13 +0200
From:   Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Adrian Reber <adrian@...as.de>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        Ley Foon Tan <lftan@...era.com>,
        "moderated list:NIOS2 ARCHITECTURE" 
        <nios2-dev@...ts.rocketboards.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] arch: wire-up clone3() syscall

On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 04:20:15PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 1:18 PM Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 11:37:50AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > >
> > > I never really liked having __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE here
> > > because it was the only one that a new architecture needed to
> > > set: all the other __ARCH_WANT_* are for system calls that
> > > are already superseded by newer ones, so a new architecture
> > > would start out with an empty list.
> > >
> > > Since __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE3 replaces
> > > __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE for new architectures, how about
> > > leaving __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE untouched but instead
> >
> > __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE is left untouched. :)
> >
> > > coming up with the reverse for clone3 and mark the architectures
> > > that specifically don't want it (if any)?
> >
> > Afaict, your suggestion is more or less the same thing what is done
> > here. So I'm not sure it buys us anything apart from future
> > architectures not needing to set __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE3.
> >
> > I expect the macro above to be only here temporarily until all arches
> > have caught up and we're sure that they don't require assembly stubs
> > (cf. [1]). A decision I'd leave to the maintainers (since even for
> > nios2 we were kind of on the fence what exactly the sys_clone stub was
> > supposed to do).
> >
> > But I'm happy to take a patch from you if it's equally or more simple
> > than this one right here.
> >
> > In any case, linux-next should be fine on all arches with this fixup
> > now.
> 
> I've looked at bit more closely at the nios2 implementation, and I
> believe this is purely an artifact of this file being copied over
> from m68k, which also has an odd definition. The glibc side
> of nios2 clone() is also odd in other ways, but that appears
> to be unrelated to the kernel ABI.
> 
> I think the best option here would be to not have any special
> cases and just hook up clone3() the same way on all
> architectures, with no #ifdef at all. If it turns out to not work
> on a particular architecture later, they can still disable the
> syscall then.

Hm, if you believe that this is fine and want to "vouch" for it by
whipping up a patch that replaces the wiring up done in [1] I'm happy to
take it. :) Otherwise I'd feel more comfortable not adding all arches at
once.

[1]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/brauner/linux.git/log/?h=clone

Christian