[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190905180750.GQ1131@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 19:07:50 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>,
David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>,
Chanho Min <chanho.min@....com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Aleksa Sarai <asarai@...e.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 01/12] lib: introduce copy_struct_{to,from}_user
helpers
On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 06:19:22AM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
> +/*
> + * "memset(p, 0, size)" but for user space buffers. Caller must have already
> + * checked access_ok(p, size).
> + */
> +static int __memzero_user(void __user *p, size_t s)
> +{
> + const char zeros[BUFFER_SIZE] = {};
> + while (s > 0) {
> + size_t n = min(s, sizeof(zeros));
> +
> + if (__copy_to_user(p, zeros, n))
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + p += n;
> + s -= n;
> + }
> + return 0;
> +}
That's called clear_user().
> +int copy_struct_to_user(void __user *dst, size_t usize,
> + const void *src, size_t ksize)
> +{
> + size_t size = min(ksize, usize);
> + size_t rest = abs(ksize - usize);
> +
> + if (unlikely(usize > PAGE_SIZE))
> + return -EFAULT;
Why?
> + } else if (usize > ksize) {
> + if (__memzero_user(dst + size, rest))
> + return -EFAULT;
> + }
> + /* Copy the interoperable parts of the struct. */
> + if (__copy_to_user(dst, src, size))
> + return -EFAULT;
Why not simply clear_user() and copy_to_user()?
> +int copy_struct_from_user(void *dst, size_t ksize,
> + const void __user *src, size_t usize)
> +{
> + size_t size = min(ksize, usize);
> + size_t rest = abs(ksize - usize);
Cute, but... you would be just as well without that 'rest' thing.
> +
> + if (unlikely(usize > PAGE_SIZE))
> + return -EFAULT;
Again, why?
> + if (unlikely(!access_ok(src, usize)))
> + return -EFAULT;
Why not simply copy_from_user() here?
> + /* Deal with trailing bytes. */
> + if (usize < ksize)
> + memset(dst + size, 0, rest);
> + else if (usize > ksize) {
> + const void __user *addr = src + size;
> + char buffer[BUFFER_SIZE] = {};
> +
> + while (rest > 0) {
> + size_t bufsize = min(rest, sizeof(buffer));
> +
> + if (__copy_from_user(buffer, addr, bufsize))
> + return -EFAULT;
> + if (memchr_inv(buffer, 0, bufsize))
> + return -E2BIG;
Frankly, that looks like a candidate for is_all_zeroes_user().
With the loop like above serving as a dumb default. And on
badly alighed address it _will_ be dumb. Probably too much
so - something like
if ((unsigned long)addr & 1) {
u8 v;
if (get_user(v, (__u8 __user *)addr))
return -EFAULT;
if (v)
return -E2BIG;
addr++;
}
if ((unsigned long)addr & 2) {
u16 v;
if (get_user(v, (__u16 __user *)addr))
return -EFAULT;
if (v)
return -E2BIG;
addr +=2;
}
if ((unsigned long)addr & 4) {
u32 v;
if (get_user(v, (__u32 __user *)addr))
return -EFAULT;
if (v)
return -E2BIG;
}
<read the rest like you currently do>
would be saner, and things like x86 could trivially add an
asm variant - it's not hard. Incidentally, memchr_inv() is
an overkill in this case...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists