linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 16/19] gendwarfksyms: Add support for reserved structure fields

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: <CABCJKudAF0=29js8SDcYY5r6kM7RBveTrZH9RyECNGqkcqy=nw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2024 18:47:31 +0000
From: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
To: Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, 
	Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, 
	Matthew Maurer <mmaurer@...gle.com>, Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, 
	Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>, Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com>, 
	Neal Gompa <neal@...pa.dev>, Hector Martin <marcan@...can.st>, Janne Grunau <j@...nau.net>, 
	Asahi Linux <asahi@...ts.linux.dev>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, 
	rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 16/19] gendwarfksyms: Add support for reserved
 structure fields

On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 10:17 PM Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me> wrote:
>
> On 19.08.24 21:38, Sami Tolvanen wrote:
> >
> > This definitely looks cleaner than unions in Rust, but how would this
> > scheme be visible in DWARF? You might also need to expand the annotation
> > to allow replacing one reserved field with multiple smaller ones without
> > using structs.
>
> Hmm that's a good question, I have no idea how DWARF works. The way you
> do it in this patch is just by the name of the field, right?

Correct, it just looks at the name of the union fields.

> If Rust's DWARF output contains exact types names (I just checked this,
> I *think* that this is the case, but I have never used/seen DWARF
> before), we might be able to just create a `KAbiReserved<T, R>` type
> that you search for instead of the attribute. The usage would then be
> like this:
>
>     #[repr(C)]
>     pub struct Struct1 {
>         a: u64,
>         _reserved: KAbiReserved<(), u64>,
>     }
>
> And then when adding a new field, you would do this:
>
>     #[repr(C)]
>     pub struct Struct1 {
>         a: u64,
>         b: KAbiReserved<Struct2, u64>,
>     }
>
>     /* Struct2 as above */
>
> The way `KAbiReserved` is implemented is via a `union` (maybe a bit
> ironic, considering what I said in my other replies, but in this case,
> we would provide a safe abstraction over this `union`, thus avoiding
> exposing users of this type to `unsafe`):
>
>     #[repr(C)]
>     pub union KAbiReserved<T, R> {
>         value: T,
>         _reserved: R,
>     }

I like this approach even better, assuming any remaining issues with
ownership etc. can be sorted out. This would also look identical to
the C version in DWARF if you rename _reserved in the union to
__kabi_reserved. Of course, we can always change gendwarfksyms to
support a different scheme for Rust code if a better solution comes
along later.

Sami