linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] rust: dma: add as_slice/write functions for CoherentAllocation

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: <D8REKSIL1W0E.6A40JD86RFPZ@proton.me>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2025 22:31:02 +0000
From: Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>
To: Abdiel Janulgue <abdiel.janulgue@...il.com>, a.hindborg@...nel.org, ojeda@...nel.org
Cc: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>, Daniel Almeida <daniel.almeida@...labora.com>, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>, 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>, "open list:DMA MAPPING HELPERS DEVICE DRIVER API [RUST]" <rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>, "open list:DMA MAPPING HELPERS" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] rust: dma: add as_slice/write functions for CoherentAllocation

On Wed Mar 26, 2025 at 9:11 PM CET, Abdiel Janulgue wrote:
> +    /// Returns the data from the region starting from `offset` as a slice.
> +    /// `offset` and `count` are in units of `T`, not the number of bytes.
> +    ///
> +    /// Due to the safety requirements of slice, the caller should consider that the region could
> +    /// be modified by the device at anytime. For ringbuffer type of r/w access or use-cases where
> +    /// the pointer to the live data is needed, `start_ptr()` or `start_ptr_mut()` could be
> +    /// used instead.
> +    ///
> +    /// # Safety
> +    ///
> +    /// * Callers must ensure that no hardware operations that involve the buffer are currently
> +    ///   taking place while the returned slice is live.
> +    /// * Callers must ensure that this call does not race with a write to the same region while
> +    ///   while the returned slice is live.
> +    pub unsafe fn as_slice(&self, offset: usize, count: usize) -> Result<&[T]> {
> +        let end = offset.checked_add(count).ok_or(EOVERFLOW)?;
> +        if end >= self.count {
> +            return Err(EINVAL);
> +        }
> +        // SAFETY:
> +        // - The pointer is valid due to type invariant on `CoherentAllocation`,
> +        // we've just checked that the range and index is within bounds. The immutability of the
> +        // of data is also guaranteed by the safety requirements of the function.
> +        // - `offset` can't overflow since it is smaller than `self.count` and we've checked
> +        // that `self.count` won't overflow early in the constructor.
> +        Ok(unsafe { core::slice::from_raw_parts(self.cpu_addr.add(offset), count) })

I vaguely recall that there was some discussion on why this is OK (ie
the value behind the reference being modified by the device), but I
haven't followed it. Can you add the reasoning for why that is fine to
some comment here?

I also am not really fond of the phrase "hardware operations that
involve the buffer":
* what do you mean with "buffer"? `self`?
* what are "hardware operations"? (I no nothing about hardware, so that
  might be a knowledge gap on my part)
* what does "involve" mean?

---
Cheers,
Benno

> +    }