linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] powerpc: properly negate error in syscall_set_return

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: <20250113175452.GA646@strace.io>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 19:54:52 +0200
From: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...ace.io>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
	Eugene Syromyatnikov <evgsyr@...il.com>,
	Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>,
	Renzo Davoli <renzo@...unibo.it>,
	Davide Berardi <berardi.dav@...il.com>,
	strace-devel@...ts.strace.io,
	Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
	Naveen N Rao <naveen@...nel.org>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] powerpc: properly negate error in
 syscall_set_return_value()

On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 06:34:44PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Le 13/01/2025 à 18:10, Dmitry V. Levin a écrit :
> > Bring syscall_set_return_value() in sync with syscall_get_error(),
> > and let upcoming ptrace/set_syscall_info selftest pass on powerpc.
> > 
> > This reverts commit 1b1a3702a65c ("powerpc: Don't negate error in
> > syscall_set_return_value()").
> 
> There is a clear detailed explanation in that commit of why it needs to 
> be done.
> 
> If you think that commit is wrong you have to explain why with at least 
> the same level of details.

I'm sorry, I'm not by any means a powerpc expert to explain why that
commit was added in the first place, I wish Michael would be able to do it
himself.  All I can say is that for some mysterious reason current
syscall_set_return_value() implementation assumes that in case of an error
regs->gpr[3] has to be negative, while, according to well-tested
syscall_get_error(), it has to be positive.

This is very visible with PTRACE_SET_SYSCALL_INFO that exposes
syscall_set_return_value() to userspace, and, in particular, with the
architecture-agnostic ptrace/set_syscall_info selftest added later in the
series.

> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/syscall.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/syscall.h
> > index 3dd36c5e334a..422d7735ace6 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/syscall.h
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/syscall.h
> > @@ -82,7 +82,11 @@ static inline void syscall_set_return_value(struct task_struct *task,
> >   		 */
> >   		if (error) {
> >   			regs->ccr |= 0x10000000L;
> > -			regs->gpr[3] = error;
> > +			/*
> > +			 * In case of an error regs->gpr[3] contains
> > +			 * a positive ERRORCODE.
> > +			 */
> > +			regs->gpr[3] = -error;
> >   		} else {
> >   			regs->ccr &= ~0x10000000L;
> >   			regs->gpr[3] = val;

-- 
ldv