linux-kernel - [PATCH RESEND] drm/i915/gem: Use user_write_access_begin() instead of user_access

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: <1acb97f184bf08078ebe0ba8a20b41937949a5a8.1619856556.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
Date:   Sat,  1 May 2021 08:15:51 +0000 (UTC)
From:   Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
To:     Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
        Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: [PATCH RESEND] drm/i915/gem: Use user_write_access_begin() instead of
 user_access_begin()

eb_copy_relocations() only do unsafe_put_user(), it only
requires write access to user.

Use user_write_access_begin() instead of user_access_begin().

Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
---
Resending with mm list in addition

 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
index 5964e67c7d36..f7a7bb45274b 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
@@ -1907,14 +1907,14 @@ static int eb_copy_relocations(const struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
 		 * happened we would make the mistake of assuming that the
 		 * relocations were valid.
 		 */
-		if (!user_access_begin(urelocs, size))
+		if (!user_write_access_begin(urelocs, size))
 			goto end;
 
 		for (copied = 0; copied < nreloc; copied++)
 			unsafe_put_user(-1,
 					&urelocs[copied].presumed_offset,
 					end_user);
-		user_access_end();
+		user_write_access_end();
 
 		eb->exec[i].relocs_ptr = (uintptr_t)relocs;
 	}
@@ -1922,7 +1922,7 @@ static int eb_copy_relocations(const struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
 	return 0;
 
 end_user:
-	user_access_end();
+	user_write_access_end();
 end:
 	kvfree(relocs);
 	err = -EFAULT;
-- 
2.25.0