[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202110212053.6F3BB603@keescook>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2021 21:00:51 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>, rostedt@...dmis.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, arnaldo.melo@...il.com,
pmladek@...e.com, peterz@...radead.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
valentin.schneider@....com, qiang.zhang@...driver.com,
robdclark@...omium.org, christian@...uner.io,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, mingo@...hat.com, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org,
kafai@...com, songliubraving@...com, yhs@...com,
john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, oliver.sang@...el.com, lkp@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/15] extend task comm from 16 to 24 for
CONFIG_BASE_FULL
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 08:52:22PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 03:45:07 +0000 Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > This patchset changes files among many subsystems. I don't know which
> > tree it should be applied to, so I just base it on Linus's tree.
>
> I can do that ;)
>
> > There're many truncated kthreads in the kernel, which may make trouble
> > for the user, for example, the user can't get detailed device
> > information from the task comm.
>
> That sucked of us.
>
> > This patchset tries to improve this problem fundamentally by extending
> > the task comm size from 16 to 24. In order to do that, we have to do
> > some cleanups first.
>
> It's at v5 and there's no evidence of review activity? C'mon, folks!
It's on my list! :) It's a pretty subtle area that rarely changes, so I
want to make sure I'm a full coffee to do the review. :)
> > 1. Make the copy of task comm always safe no matter what the task
> > comm size is. For example,
> >
> > Unsafe Safe
> > strlcpy strscpy_pad
> > strncpy strscpy_pad
> > bpf_probe_read_kernel bpf_probe_read_kernel_str
> > bpf_core_read_str
> > bpf_get_current_comm
> > perf_event__prepare_comm
> > prctl(2)
> >
> > 2. Replace the old hard-coded 16 with a new macro TASK_COMM_LEN_16 to
> > make it more grepable.
> >
> > 3. Extend the task comm size to 24 for CONFIG_BASE_FULL case and keep it
> > as 16 for CONFIG_BASE_SMALL.
>
> Is this justified? How much simpler/more reliable/more maintainable/
> would the code be if we were to make CONFIG_BASE_SMALL suffer with the
> extra 8 bytes?
Does anyone "own" CONFIG_BASE_SMALL? Gonna go with "no":
$ git ann init/Kconfig| grep 'config BASE_SMALL'
1da177e4c3f41 (Linus Torvalds 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 2054)config BASE_SMALL
And it looks mostly unused:
$ git grep CONFIG_BASE_SMALL | cut -d: -f1 | sort -u | xargs -n1 git ann -f | grep 'CONFIG_BASE_SMALL'
b2af018ff26f1 (Ingo Molnar 2009-01-28 17:36:56 +0100 18)#if CONFIG_BASE_SMALL == 0
fcdba07ee390d ( Jiri Olsa 2011-02-07 19:31:25 +0100 54)#define CON_BUF_SIZE (CONFIG_BASE_SMALL ? 256 : PAGE_SIZE)
Blaming lines: 100% (46/46), done.
1da177e4c3f41 (Linus Torvalds 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 28)#define PID_MAX_DEFAULT (CONFIG_BASE_SMALL ? 0x1000 : 0x8000)
1da177e4c3f41 (Linus Torvalds 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 34)#define PID_MAX_LIMIT (CONFIG_BASE_SMALL ? PAGE_SIZE * 8 : \
Blaming lines: 100% (162/162), done.
f86dcc5aa8c79 (Eric Dumazet 2009-10-07 00:37:59 +0000 31)#define UDP_HTABLE_SIZE_MIN (CONFIG_BASE_SMALL ? 128 : 256)
02c02bf12c5d8 (Matthew Wilcox 2017-11-03 23:09:45 -0400 1110)#define XA_CHUNK_SHIFT (CONFIG_BASE_SMALL ? 4 : 6)
a52b89ebb6d44 (Davidlohr Bueso 2014-01-12 15:31:23 -0800 4249)#if CONFIG_BASE_SMALL
7b44ab978b77a (Eric W. Biederman 2011-11-16 23:20:58 -0800 78)#define UIDHASH_BITS (CONFIG_BASE_SMALL ? 3 : 7)
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists