linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dma-buf: fix use of DMA_BUF_SET_NAME

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: <c1479285-7fd8-b73a-9672-6e0d7db4cbdf@amd.com>
Date:   Tue, 17 May 2022 09:30:24 +0200
From:   Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>
To:     Jerome Pouiller <Jerome.Pouiller@...abs.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
        Jason Ekstrand <jason@...kstrand.net>,
        Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@...labora.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dma-buf: fix use of DMA_BUF_SET_NAME_{A,B} in userspace

Am 17.05.22 um 09:27 schrieb Jerome Pouiller:
> From: Jérôme Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@...abs.com>
>
> The typedefs u32 and u64 are not available in userspace. Thus user get
> an error he try to use DMA_BUF_SET_NAME_A or DMA_BUF_SET_NAME_B:
>
>      $ gcc -Wall   -c -MMD -c -o ioctls_list.o ioctls_list.c
>      In file included from /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/asm/ioctl.h:1,
>                       from /usr/include/linux/ioctl.h:5,
>                       from /usr/include/asm-generic/ioctls.h:5,
>                       from ioctls_list.c:11:
>      ioctls_list.c:463:29: error: ‘u32’ undeclared here (not in a function)
>        463 |     { "DMA_BUF_SET_NAME_A", DMA_BUF_SET_NAME_A, -1, -1 }, // linux/dma-buf.h
>            |                             ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>      ioctls_list.c:464:29: error: ‘u64’ undeclared here (not in a function)
>        464 |     { "DMA_BUF_SET_NAME_B", DMA_BUF_SET_NAME_B, -1, -1 }, // linux/dma-buf.h
>            |                             ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> The issue was initially reported here[1].
>
> [1]: https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fjerome-pouiller%2Fioctl%2Fpull%2F14&amp;data=05%7C01%7Cchristian.koenig%40amd.com%7C4b665e3c2222463014ec08da37d6b3f4%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637883692533547283%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=prj%2BSOuf%2B1IWK1XKGD381LhDuL9qOoj7lYy8xMoV%2B6o%3D&amp;reserved=0
>
> Signed-off-by: Jérôme Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@...abs.com>

Good catch, Reviewed-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>

CC: stable?
Fixes: ?

> ---
>   include/uapi/linux/dma-buf.h | 4 ++--
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/dma-buf.h b/include/uapi/linux/dma-buf.h
> index 8e4a2ca0bcbf..b1523cb8ab30 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/dma-buf.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/dma-buf.h
> @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ struct dma_buf_sync {
>    * between them in actual uapi, they're just different numbers.
>    */
>   #define DMA_BUF_SET_NAME	_IOW(DMA_BUF_BASE, 1, const char *)
> -#define DMA_BUF_SET_NAME_A	_IOW(DMA_BUF_BASE, 1, u32)
> -#define DMA_BUF_SET_NAME_B	_IOW(DMA_BUF_BASE, 1, u64)
> +#define DMA_BUF_SET_NAME_A	_IOW(DMA_BUF_BASE, 1, __u32)
> +#define DMA_BUF_SET_NAME_B	_IOW(DMA_BUF_BASE, 1, __u64)
>   
>   #endif