linux-kernel - Re: [git pull] iov

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: <YTrHYYEQslQzvnWW@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>
Date:   Fri, 10 Sep 2021 02:48:01 +0000
From:   Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [git pull] iov_iter fixes

On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 07:35:13PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:

> Yep ok I follow you now. And yes, if we get a partial one but one that
> has more consumed than what was returned, that would not work well. I'm
> guessing that a) we've never seen that, or b) we always end up with
> either correctly advanced OR fully advanced, and the fully advanced case
> would then just return 0 next time and we'd just get a short IO back to
> userspace.
> 
> The safer way here would likely be to import the iovec again. We're
> still in the context of the original submission, and the sqe hasn't been
> consumed in the ring yet, so that can be done safely.

... until you end up with something assuming that you've got the same
iovec from userland the second time around.

IOW, generally it's a bad idea to do that kind of re-imports.