linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/14] x86: use more conventional 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:45:52 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux-sh list <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>, Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>,
        sparclinux <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:QUALCOMM HEXAGON..." <linux-hexagon@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
        Brian Cain <bcain@...eaurora.org>,
        Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        linux-csky@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        "open list:SYNOPSYS ARC ARCHITECTURE" 
        <linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "open list:TENSILICA XTENSA PORT (xtensa)" 
        <linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
        alpha <linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-um <linux-um@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-m68k <linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org>,
        Openrisc <openrisc@...ts.librecores.org>,
        Greentime Hu <green.hu@...il.com>,
        Stafford Horne <shorne@...il.com>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>,
        Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
        Parisc List <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Nick Hu <nickhu@...estech.com>,
        "open list:BROADCOM NVRAM DRIVER" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@...nel.org>,
        "Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/14] x86: use more conventional access_ok() definition

On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 6:02 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 05:34:42PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > +#define __range_not_ok(addr, size, limit)    (!__access_ok(addr, size))
> > +#define __chk_range_not_ok(addr, size, limit)        (!__access_ok((void __user *)addr, size))
>
> Can we just kill these off insted of letting themm obsfucate the code?

As Al pointed out, they turned out to be necessary on sparc64, but the only
definitions are on sparc64 and x86, so it's possible that they serve a similar
purpose here, in which case changing the limit from TASK_SIZE to
TASK_SIZE_MAX is probably wrong as well.

So either I need to revert the original definition as I did on sparc64, or
they can be removed completely. Hopefully Al or the x86 maintainers
can clarify.

         Arnd