linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] vhost: force spec specified alignment on types

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

Message-ID: <045c84ed-151e-a850-9c72-5079bd2775e6@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 6 Apr 2020 21:34:00 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vhost: force spec specified alignment on types


On 2020/4/6 下午8:50, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> The ring element addresses are passed between components with different
> alignments assumptions. Thus, if guest/userspace selects a pointer and
> host then gets and dereferences it, we might need to decrease the
> compiler-selected alignment to prevent compiler on the host from
> assuming pointer is aligned.
>
> This actually triggers on ARM with -mabi=apcs-gnu - which is a
> deprecated configuration, but it seems safer to handle this
> generally.
>
> I verified that the produced binary is exactly identical on x86.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com>
> ---
>
> This is my preferred way to handle the ARM incompatibility issues
> (in preference to kconfig hacks).
> I will push this into next now.
> Comments?


I'm not sure if it's too late to fix. It would still be still 
problematic for the userspace that is using old uapi headers?

Thanks


>
>   drivers/vhost/vhost.h            |  6 ++---
>   include/uapi/linux/virtio_ring.h | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>   2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vhost.h b/drivers/vhost/vhost.h
> index cc82918158d2..a67bda9792ec 100644
> --- a/drivers/vhost/vhost.h
> +++ b/drivers/vhost/vhost.h
> @@ -74,9 +74,9 @@ struct vhost_virtqueue {
>   	/* The actual ring of buffers. */
>   	struct mutex mutex;
>   	unsigned int num;
> -	struct vring_desc __user *desc;
> -	struct vring_avail __user *avail;
> -	struct vring_used __user *used;
> +	vring_desc_t __user *desc;
> +	vring_avail_t __user *avail;
> +	vring_used_t __user *used;
>   	const struct vhost_iotlb_map *meta_iotlb[VHOST_NUM_ADDRS];
>   
>   	struct vhost_desc *descs;
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/virtio_ring.h b/include/uapi/linux/virtio_ring.h
> index 559f42e73315..cd6e0b2eaf2f 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/virtio_ring.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/virtio_ring.h
> @@ -118,16 +118,6 @@ struct vring_used {
>   	struct vring_used_elem ring[];
>   };
>   
> -struct vring {
> -	unsigned int num;
> -
> -	struct vring_desc *desc;
> -
> -	struct vring_avail *avail;
> -
> -	struct vring_used *used;
> -};
> -
>   /* Alignment requirements for vring elements.
>    * When using pre-virtio 1.0 layout, these fall out naturally.
>    */
> @@ -164,6 +154,37 @@ struct vring {
>   #define vring_used_event(vr) ((vr)->avail->ring[(vr)->num])
>   #define vring_avail_event(vr) (*(__virtio16 *)&(vr)->used->ring[(vr)->num])
>   
> +/*
> + * The ring element addresses are passed between components with different
> + * alignments assumptions. Thus, we might need to decrease the compiler-selected
> + * alignment, and so must use a typedef to make sure the __aligned attribute
> + * actually takes hold:
> + *
> + * https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs//gcc/Common-Type-Attributes.html#Common-Type-Attributes
> + *
> + * When used on a struct, or struct member, the aligned attribute can only
> + * increase the alignment; in order to decrease it, the packed attribute must
> + * be specified as well. When used as part of a typedef, the aligned attribute
> + * can both increase and decrease alignment, and specifying the packed
> + * attribute generates a warning.
> + */
> +typedef struct vring_desc __attribute__((aligned(VRING_DESC_ALIGN_SIZE)))
> +	vring_desc_t;
> +typedef struct vring_avail __attribute__((aligned(VRING_AVAIL_ALIGN_SIZE)))
> +	vring_avail_t;
> +typedef struct vring_used __attribute__((aligned(VRING_USED_ALIGN_SIZE)))
> +	vring_used_t;
> +
> +struct vring {
> +	unsigned int num;
> +
> +	vring_desc_t *desc;
> +
> +	vring_avail_t *avail;
> +
> +	vring_used_t *used;
> +};
> +
>   static inline void vring_init(struct vring *vr, unsigned int num, void *p,
>   			      unsigned long align)
>   {