netdev - RE: [PATCH 5/9 next] scsi: Use iovec_import() instead of import

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: <ce03301db65f4fee8c9da25a6bc980f7@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date:   Mon, 21 Sep 2020 14:50:01 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Christoph Hellwig' <hch@...radead.org>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "io-uring@...r.kernel.org" <io-uring@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 5/9 next] scsi: Use iovec_import() instead of
 import_iovec().

From: Christoph Hellwig
> Sent: 21 September 2020 15:22
> 
> So looking at the various callers I'm not sure this API is the
> best.  If we want to do something fancy I'd hide the struct iovec
> instances entirely with something like:
> 
> struct iov_storage {
> 	struct iovec stack[UIO_FASTIOV], *vec;
> }
> 
> int iov_iter_import_iovec(struct iov_iter *iter, struct iov_storage *s,
> 		const struct iovec __user *vec, unsigned long nr_segs,
> 		int type);
> 
> and then add a new helper to free the thing if needed:
> 
> void iov_iter_release_iovec(struct iov_storage *s)
> {
> 	if (s->vec != s->stack)
> 		kfree(s->vec);
> }

I didn't think of going that far.
There are 2 call sites (in scsi) that don't pass the cache.

Given that the 'buffer to free' address probably needs to
be spilled to stack forcing in into an on-stack structure
that is already passed by address is probably a good idea.

The iov_iter_release_iovec() should be static inline and just:
	if (s->vec)
		kfree(s->vec);
You want the test because 99.99% of the time it will be NULL.
The kernel iov[] to use is iter.iov not part of the cache.

That will be a bigger change on the io_uring code.
(The patch I didn't write.)

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)