linux-kernel - Re: clone3 on ARC (was 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20200116112517.53luv7qolevtqjpu@wittgenstein>
Date:   Thu, 16 Jan 2020 12:25:18 +0100
From:   Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
To:     Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>
Cc:     Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        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>,
        arcml <linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: clone3 on ARC (was Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] arch: wire-up clone3()
 syscall)

On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 10:41:20PM +0000, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> On 6/4/19 2:29 PM, Christian Brauner wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 08:40:01PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 6:09 PM Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Wire up the clone3() call on all arches that don't require hand-rolled
> >>> assembly.
> >>>
> >>> Some of the arches look like they need special assembly massaging and it is
> >>> probably smarter if the appropriate arch maintainers would do the actual
> >>> wiring. Arches that are wired-up are:
> >>> - x86{_32,64}
> >>> - arm{64}
> >>> - xtensa
> >>
> >> The ones you did look good to me. I would hope that we can do all other
> >> architectures the same way, even if they have special assembly wrappers
> >> for the old clone(). The most interesting cases appear to be ia64, alpha,
> >> m68k and sparc, so it would be good if their maintainers could take a
> >> look.
> > 
> > Yes, agreed. They can sort this out even after this lands.
> > 
> >>
> >> What do you use for testing? Would it be possible to override the
> >> internal clone() function in glibc with an LD_PRELOAD library
> >> to quickly test one of the other architectures for regressions?
> > 
> > I have a test program that is rather horrendously ugly and I compiled
> > kernels for x86 and the arms and tested in qemu. The program basically
> > looks like [1].
> 
> I just got around to fixing this for ARC (patch to follow after we sort out the
> testing) and was trying to use the test case below for a qucik and dirty smoke
> test (so existing toolchain lacking with headers lacking NR_clone3 or struct
> clone_args etc). I did hack those up, but then spotted below
> 
> uapi/linux/sched.h
> 
> |    struct clone_args {
> |	__aligned_u64 flags;
> |	__aligned_u64 pidfd;
> |	__aligned_u64 child_tid;
> |	__aligned_u64 parent_tid;
> ..
> ..
> 
> Are all clone3 arg fields supposed to be 64-bit wide, even things like @child_tid,
> @tls .... which are traditionally ARCH word wide ?

This is just the kernel ABI we expose to userspace with the intention to
make it easy for us to handle 32 and 64 bit. A libc like glibc is
expected to expose a properly typed struct to userspace. The kernel
struct kernel_clone_args has "correct" typing.

Christian