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  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]
Date:   Mon, 21 Sep 2020 19:13:18 +0300
From:   Pavel Begunkov <>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <>,
        Arnd Bergmann <>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <>, Christoph Hellwig <>,
        Al Viro <>,
        Andrew Morton <>,
        Jens Axboe <>,
        David Howells <>,
        linux-arm-kernel <>,
        X86 ML <>, LKML <>,
        "open list:MIPS" <>,
        Parisc List <>,
        linuxppc-dev <>,
        linux-s390 <>,
        sparclinux <>,
        linux-block <>,
        Linux SCSI List <>,
        Linux FS Devel <>,
        linux-aio <>,,
        linux-arch <>,
        Linux-MM <>,
        Network Development <>,,
        LSM List <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] kernel: add a PF_FORCE_COMPAT flag

On 21/09/2020 19:10, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 20/09/2020 01:22, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> On Sep 19, 2020, at 2:16 PM, Arnd Bergmann <> wrote:
>>> ´╗┐On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 6:21 PM Andy Lutomirski <> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 8:16 AM Christoph Hellwig <> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 02:58:22PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
>>>>>> Said that, why not provide a variant that would take an explicit
>>>>>> "is it compat" argument and use it there?  And have the normal
>>>>>> one pass in_compat_syscall() to that...
>>>>> That would help to not introduce a regression with this series yes.
>>>>> But it wouldn't fix existing bugs when io_uring is used to access
>>>>> read or write methods that use in_compat_syscall().  One example that
>>>>> I recently ran into is drivers/scsi/sg.c.
>>> Ah, so reading /dev/input/event* would suffer from the same issue,
>>> and that one would in fact be broken by your patch in the hypothetical
>>> case that someone tried to use io_uring to read /dev/input/event on x32...
>>> For reference, I checked the socket timestamp handling that has a
>>> number of corner cases with time32/time64 formats in compat mode,
>>> but none of those appear to be affected by the problem.
>>>> Aside from the potentially nasty use of per-task variables, one thing
>>>> I don't like about PF_FORCE_COMPAT is that it's one-way.  If we're
>>>> going to have a generic mechanism for this, shouldn't we allow a full
>>>> override of the syscall arch instead of just allowing forcing compat
>>>> so that a compat syscall can do a non-compat operation?
>>> The only reason it's needed here is that the caller is in a kernel
>>> thread rather than a system call. Are there any possible scenarios
>>> where one would actually need the opposite?
>> I can certainly imagine needing to force x32 mode from a kernel thread.
>> As for the other direction: what exactly are the desired bitness/arch semantics of io_uring?  Is the operation bitness chosen by the io_uring creation or by the io_uring_enter() bitness?
> It's rather the second one. Even though AFAIR it wasn't discussed
> specifically, that how it works now (_partially_).

Double checked -- I'm wrong, that's the former one. Most of it is based
on a flag that was set an creation.

Pavel Begunkov

Powered by blists - more mailing lists