linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH -next V3 1/6] x86: fix function define in copy_mc_to

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: <cd01ee8b-6686-fe8e-0d02-5507165f55eb@huawei.com>
Date:   Tue, 12 Apr 2022 19:49:38 +0800
From:   Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>
To:     Tong Tiangen <tongtiangen@...wei.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        "Alexander Viro" <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, <x86@...nel.org>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC:     <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Xie XiuQi <xiexiuqi@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH -next V3 1/6] x86: fix function define in
 copy_mc_to_user


On 2022/4/12 15:25, Tong Tiangen wrote:
> X86 has it's implementation of copy_mc_to_user but not use #define to
> declare.
>
> This may cause problems, for example, if other architectures open
> CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_COPY_MC, but want to use copy_mc_to_user() outside the
> architecture, the code add to include/linux/uaddess.h is as follows:
>
>      #ifndef copy_mc_to_user
>      static inline unsigned long __must_check
>      copy_mc_to_user(void *dst, const void *src, size_t cnt)
>      {
> 	    ...
>      }
>      #endif
>
> Then this definition will conflict with the implementation of X86 and cause
> compilation errors.
Does powerpc need this define?
>
> Fixes: ec6347bb4339 ("x86, powerpc: Rename memcpy_mcsafe() to copy_mc_to_{user, kernel}()")
> Signed-off-by: Tong Tiangen <tongtiangen@...wei.com>
> ---
>   arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h | 1 +
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> index f78e2b3501a1..e18c5f098025 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> @@ -415,6 +415,7 @@ copy_mc_to_kernel(void *to, const void *from, unsigned len);
>   
>   unsigned long __must_check
>   copy_mc_to_user(void *to, const void *from, unsigned len);
> +#define copy_mc_to_user copy_mc_to_user
>   #endif
>   
>   /*