Date:   Wed, 11 Sep 2019 20:37:30 +1000
From:   Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        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>,
        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,
        patrick.bellasi@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 01/12] lib: introduce copy_struct_{to,from}_user
 helpers

On 2019-09-05, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 11:43:05AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 07:26:22PM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
> > > On 2019-09-05, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 06:19:22AM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
> > > > > +/**
> > > > > + * copy_struct_to_user: copy a struct to user space
> > > > > + * @dst:   Destination address, in user space.
> > > > > + * @usize: Size of @dst struct.
> > > > > + * @src:   Source address, in kernel space.
> > > > > + * @ksize: Size of @src struct.
> > > > > + *
> > > > > + * Copies a struct from kernel space to user space, in a way that guarantees
> > > > > + * backwards-compatibility for struct syscall arguments (as long as future
> > > > > + * struct extensions are made such that all new fields are *appended* to the
> > > > > + * old struct, and zeroed-out new fields have the same meaning as the old
> > > > > + * struct).
> > > > > + *
> > > > > + * @ksize is just sizeof(*dst), and @usize should've been passed by user space.
> > > > > + * The recommended usage is something like the following:
> > > > > + *
> > > > > + *   SYSCALL_DEFINE2(foobar, struct foo __user *, uarg, size_t, usize)
> > > > > + *   {
> > > > > + *      int err;
> > > > > + *      struct foo karg = {};
> > > > > + *
> > > > > + *      // do something with karg
> > > > > + *
> > > > > + *      err = copy_struct_to_user(uarg, usize, &karg, sizeof(karg));
> > > > > + *      if (err)
> > > > > + *        return err;
> > > > > + *
> > > > > + *      // ...
> > > > > + *   }
> > > > > + *
> > > > > + * There are three cases to consider:
> > > > > + *  * If @usize == @ksize, then it's copied verbatim.
> > > > > + *  * If @usize < @ksize, then kernel space is "returning" a newer struct to an
> > > > > + *    older user space. In order to avoid user space getting incomplete
> > > > > + *    information (new fields might be important), all trailing bytes in @src
> > > > > + *    (@ksize - @usize) must be zerored
> > > > 
> > > > s/zerored/zero/, right?
> > > 
> > > It should've been "zeroed".
> > 
> > That reads wrong to me; that way it reads like this function must take
> > that action and zero out the 'rest'; which is just wrong.
> > 
> > This function must verify those bytes are zero, not make them zero.
> > 
> > > > >                                          , otherwise -EFBIG is returned.
> > > > 
> > > > 'Funny' that, copy_struct_from_user() below seems to use E2BIG.
> > > 
> > > This is a copy of the semantics that sched_[sg]etattr(2) uses -- E2BIG for
> > > a "too big" struct passed to the kernel, and EFBIG for a "too big"
> > > struct passed to user-space. I would personally have preferred EMSGSIZE
> > > instead of EFBIG, but felt using the existing error codes would be less
> > > confusing.
> > 
> > Sadly a recent commit:
> > 
> >   1251201c0d34 ("sched/core: Fix uclamp ABI bug, clean up and robustify sched_read_attr() ABI logic and code")
> > 
> > Made the situation even 'worse'.
> 
> And thinking more about things; I'm not convinced the above patch is
> actually right.
> 
> Do we really want to simply truncate all the attributes of the task?
> 
> And should we not at least set sched_flags when there are non-default
> clamp values applied?
> 
> See; that is I think the primary bug that had chrt failing; we tried to
> publish the default clamp values as !0.

I just saw this patch in -rc8 -- should I even attempt to port
sched_getattr(2) to copy_struct_to_user()? I agree that publishing a
default non-zero value is a mistake -- once you do that, old user space
will either get confused or lose information.

-- 
Aleksa Sarai
Senior Software Engineer (Containers)
SUSE Linux GmbH
<https://www.cyphar.com/>

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists