linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 00/24] Remove COMMAND_LINE

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]
Date:   Fri, 3 Mar 2023 12:59:01 +0100
From:   Alexandre Ghiti <alex@...ti.fr>
To:     "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, hca@...ux.ibm.com
Cc:     geert@...ux-m68k.org, alexghiti@...osinc.com, corbet@....net,
        Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@...aro.org>,
        ink@...assic.park.msu.ru, mattst88@...il.com, vgupta@...nel.org,
        linux@...linux.org.uk, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, chenhuacai@...nel.org,
        kernel@...0n.name, monstr@...str.eu, tsbogend@...ha.franken.de,
        James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com, deller@....de,
        mpe@...erman.id.au, npiggin@...il.com, christophe.leroy@...roup.eu,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        aou@...s.berkeley.edu, gor@...ux.ibm.com, agordeev@...ux.ibm.com,
        borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com, svens@...ux.ibm.com,
        ysato@...rs.osdn.me, dalias@...c.org, davem@...emloft.net,
        tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, chris@...kel.net,
        jcmvbkbc@...il.com, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org, linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
        loongarch@...ts.linux.dev, linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
        sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/24] Remove COMMAND_LINE_SIZE from uapi

Hi Peter,


On 3/2/23 20:50, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On March 1, 2023 7:17:18 PM PST, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 14 Feb 2023 01:19:02 PST (-0800), hca@...ux.ibm.com wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 09:58:17AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>> Hi Heiko,
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 9:39 AM Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 08:49:01AM +0100, Alexandre Ghiti wrote:
>>>>>> This all came up in the context of increasing COMMAND_LINE_SIZE in the
>>>>>> RISC-V port.  In theory that's a UABI break, as COMMAND_LINE_SIZE is the
>>>>>> maximum length of /proc/cmdline and userspace could staticly rely on
>>>>>> that to be correct.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Usually I wouldn't mess around with changing this sort of thing, but
>>>>>> PowerPC increased it with a5980d064fe2 ("powerpc: Bump COMMAND_LINE_SIZE
>>>>>> to 2048").  There are also a handful of examples of COMMAND_LINE_SIZE
>>>>>> increasing, but they're from before the UAPI split so I'm not quite sure
>>>>>> what that means: e5a6a1c90948 ("powerpc: derive COMMAND_LINE_SIZE from
>>>>>> asm-generic"), 684d2fd48e71 ("[S390] kernel: Append scpdata to kernel
>>>>>> boot command line"), 22242681cff5 ("MIPS: Extend COMMAND_LINE_SIZE"),
>>>>>> and 2b74b85693c7 ("sh: Derive COMMAND_LINE_SIZE from
>>>>>> asm-generic/setup.h.").
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems to me like COMMAND_LINE_SIZE really just shouldn't have been
>>>>>> part of the uapi to begin with, and userspace should be able to handle
>>>>>> /proc/cmdline of whatever length it turns out to be.  I don't see any
>>>>>> references to COMMAND_LINE_SIZE anywhere but Linux via a quick Google
>>>>>> search, but that's not really enough to consider it unused on my end.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The feedback on the v1 seemed to indicate that COMMAND_LINE_SIZE really
>>>>>> shouldn't be part of uapi, so this now touches all the ports.  I've
>>>>>> tried to split this all out and leave it bisectable, but I haven't
>>>>>> tested it all that aggressively.
>>>>> Just to confirm this assumption a bit more: that's actually the same
>>>>> conclusion that we ended up with when commit 3da0243f906a ("s390: make
>>>>> command line configurable") went upstream.
>> Thanks, I guess I'd missed that one.  At some point I think there was some discussion of making this a Kconfig for everyone, which seems reasonable to me -- our use case for this being extended is syzkaller, but we're sort of just picking a value that's big enough for now and running with it.
>>
>> Probably best to get it out of uapi first, though, as that way at least it's clear that it's not uABI.
>>
>>>> Commit 622021cd6c560ce7 ("s390: make command line configurable"),
>>>> I assume?
>>> Yes, sorry for that. I got distracted while writing and used the wrong
>>> branch to look this up.
>> Alex: Probably worth adding that to the list in the cover letter as it looks like you were planning on a v4 anyway (which I guess you now have to do, given that I just added the issue to RISC-V).
> The only use that is uapi is the *default* length of the command line if the kernel header doesn't include it (in the case of x86, it is in the bzImage header, but that is atchitecture- or even boot format-specific.)

Is COMMAND_LINE_SIZE what you call the default length? Does that mean 
that to you the patchset is wrong?

Thanks,

Alex