linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 09/22] rust: pin-init: move impl `Zeroable` for `Opaque` and `Option<KBox<T>>` into the kernel crate

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: <D88BHSCKZ8MO.10J627BIF6I97@proton.me>
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2025 12:05:28 +0000
From: Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>
To: Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>
Cc: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>, Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/22] rust: pin-init: move impl `Zeroable` for `Opaque` and `Option<KBox<T>>` into the kernel crate

On Wed Mar 5, 2025 at 12:26 PM CET, Andreas Hindborg wrote:
> "Benno Lossin" <benno.lossin@...ton.me> writes:
>
>> In order to make pin-init a standalone crate, move kernel-specific code
>> directly into the kernel crate. Since `Opaque<T>` and `KBox<T>` are part
>> of the kernel, move their `Zeroable` implementation into the kernel
>> crate.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>
>> ---
>>  rust/kernel/alloc/kbox.rs | 8 +++++++-
>>  rust/kernel/types.rs      | 5 ++++-
>>  rust/pin-init/src/lib.rs  | 8 +-------
>>  3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/rust/kernel/alloc/kbox.rs b/rust/kernel/alloc/kbox.rs
>> index 39a3ea7542da..9861433559dc 100644
>> --- a/rust/kernel/alloc/kbox.rs
>> +++ b/rust/kernel/alloc/kbox.rs
>> @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
>>  use core::ptr::NonNull;
>>  use core::result::Result;
>>
>> -use crate::init::{InPlaceWrite, Init, PinInit};
>> +use crate::init::{InPlaceWrite, Init, PinInit, Zeroable};
>>  use crate::init_ext::InPlaceInit;
>>  use crate::types::ForeignOwnable;
>>
>> @@ -100,6 +100,12 @@
>>  /// ```
>>  pub type KVBox<T> = Box<T, super::allocator::KVmalloc>;
>>
>> +// SAFETY: All zeros is equivalent to `None` (option layout optimization guarantee).
>> +//
>> +// In this case we are allowed to use `T: ?Sized`, since all zeros is the `None` variant and there
>> +// is no problem with a VTABLE pointer being null.
>> +unsafe impl<T: ?Sized, A: Allocator> Zeroable for Option<Box<T, A>> {}
>
> Could you elaborate the statement related to vtable pointers? How does
> that come into play for `Option<Box<_>>`? Is it for fat pointers to
> trait objects?

Yes it is for fat pointers, if you have a `x: *mut dyn Trait`, then you
aren't allowed to write all zeroes to `x`, because the VTABLE pointer
(that is part of the fat pointer) is not allowed to be null.

Now for `Option<Box<_>>`, this doesn't matter, as there if the normal
pointer part of the fat pointer is all zeroes, then the VTABLE pointer
part is considered padding bytes, as it's the `None` variant.

---
Cheers,
Benno