netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3] net: ioctl: Use kernel memory on protocol ioctl callbacks

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAF=yD-LO8fZJfayJoFPO_wvMw=FLGbf_DYUcaBpKv81OEOQVUA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2023 10:09:53 -0400
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>, Remi Denis-Courmont <courmisch@...il.com>, 
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, 
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, 
	Alexander Aring <alex.aring@...il.com>, Stefan Schmidt <stefan@...enfreihafen.org>, 
	Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>, Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@...sares.net>, 
	Mat Martineau <martineau@...nel.org>, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>, 
	Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>, leit@...com, axboe@...nel.dk, asml.silence@...il.com, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, dccp@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-wpan@...r.kernel.org, mptcp@...ts.linux.dev, linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3] net: ioctl: Use kernel memory on protocol
 ioctl callbacks

On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 5:08 AM Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 12:06:00PM -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 11:34 AM David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > On 5/25/23 9:05 AM, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > > > I don't understand what this buys us vs testing the sk_family,
> > > > sk_protocol and cmd here.
> > >
> > > To keep protocol specific code out of core files is the reason I
> > > suggested it.
> >
> > I guess you object to demultiplexing based on per-family
> > protocol and ioctl cmd constants directly in this file?
> >
> > That only requires including the smaller uapi headers.
> >
> > But now net/core/sock.h now still has to add includes
> > linux/mroute.h, linux/mroute6.h and net/phonet/phonet.h.
> >
> > Aside on phonet_is_sk, if we're keeping this: this should be
> > sk_is_phonet? Analogous to sk_is_tcp and such. And, it should suffice
> > to  demultiplex based on the protocol family, without testing the
> > type or protocol. The family is defined in protocol-independent header
> > linux/socket.h. The differences between
> > PN_PROTO_PHONET and PN_PROTO_PIPE should be handled inside the family
> > code. So I think it is cleaner just to open-coded as `if
> > (sk->sk_family == PF_PHONET)`
>
> Should we do the same for ipmr as well? Currently I am checking it
> using:
>
>         return sk->sk_type == SOCK_RAW && inet_sk(sk)->inet_num == IPPROTO_ICMPV6;
>
> This is what ip{6}mr functions[1] are use to check if `sk` is using ip{6}mr.
> If we just use `sk->family`, then I suppose that `sk_is_ip6mr` would be
> something as coded below. Is this correct?
>
>         static inline int sk_is_ip6mr(struct sock *sk)
>         {
>                 return sk->sk_family == PF_INET6;
>         }

Actually, for multicast routing, the protocol check is required.

> Anyway, should we continue with the current (V3) approach, where we keep
> the protocol code out of core files, or, should I come back to the
> previous (V2) approach, where the protocol checks is coded directly in
> the core file?

David expressed preference for the current approach. So let's stay with that.