linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/6] uaccess: remove segment

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: <CAHk-=wgpYFEPMfYmNR-9SuPaeC432sC7nmZrismRHQEiR2GM4g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 14 Jul 2020 08:27:14 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     Nick Hu <nickhu@...estech.com>, Greentime Hu <green.hu@...il.com>,
        Vincent Chen <deanbo422@...il.com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] uaccess: remove segment_eq

Ack, just with a note:

On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 4:06 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
>
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ static inline void set_fs(mm_segment_t fs)
>         set_thread_flag(TIF_FSCHECK);
>  }
>
> -#define segment_eq(a, b)       ((a).seg == (b).seg)
> +#define uaccess_kernel() (get_fs().seg == KERNEL_DS.seg)
>  #define user_addr_max() (current->thread.addr_limit.seg)

This "uaccess_kernel()" interface is a better model anyway, because at
least on x86 (and from a quick glance at others), we might avoid the
exact equality comparison, and instead do simpler/better things.

On x86-64, for example, checking whether the limit has the high bit
set is not only more flexible and correct, it's much cheaper too.

Of course, trying to get rid of all this means that it doesn't matter
so much, but it would probably have been good to do this part years
ago regardless.

                  Linus