linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] loop: Add LOOP_SET_FD_AND

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]

Date:   Wed, 22 Apr 2020 10:07:52 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Martijn Coenen <maco@...roid.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>,
        Narayan Kamath <narayan@...gle.com>,
        Zimuzo Ezeozue <zezeozue@...gle.com>, kernel-team@...roid.com,
        linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Martijn Coenen <maco@...gle.com>,
        Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
        Chaitanya Kulkarni <Chaitanya.Kulkarni@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] loop: Add LOOP_SET_FD_AND_STATUS ioctl.

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 10:06:17AM +0200, Martijn Coenen wrote:
> > line at the top of lo_compat_ioctl, and switches the LOOP_SET_STATUS
> > and LOOP_GET_STATUS case to it?
> 
> Did you mean in regular lo_ioctl()?

Yes, sorry.

> eg something like this:
> 
> @@ -1671,6 +1671,7 @@ static int lo_ioctl(struct block_device *bdev,
> fmode_t mode,
>         unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
>  {
>         struct loop_device *lo = bdev->bd_disk->private_data;
> +       void __user *argp = (void __user *) arg;
>         int err;
> 
>         switch (cmd) {
> @@ -1694,21 +1695,19 @@ static int lo_ioctl(struct block_device *bdev,
> fmode_t mode,
>         case LOOP_SET_STATUS:
>                 err = -EPERM;
>                 if ((mode & FMODE_WRITE) || capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN)) {
> -                       err = loop_set_status_old(lo,
> -                                       (struct loop_info __user *)arg);
> +                       err = loop_set_status_old(lo, argp);
>                 }
>                 break;
>         case LOOP_GET_STATUS:
> -               return loop_get_status_old(lo, (struct loop_info __user *) arg);
> +               return loop_get_status_old(lo, argp);
>         case LOOP_SET_STATUS64:
>                 err = -EPERM;
>                 if ((mode & FMODE_WRITE) || capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN)) {
> -                       err = loop_set_status64(lo,
> -                                       (struct loop_info64 __user *) arg);
> +                       err = loop_set_status64(lo, argp);
>                 }
>                 break;
>         case LOOP_GET_STATUS64:
> -               return loop_get_status64(lo, (struct loop_info64 __user *) arg);
> +               return loop_get_status64(lo, argp);

Exactly!