netdev - Re: Bug in short splice to socket?

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: <1227123.1685706296@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2023 12:44:56 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
    netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S.
 Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
    Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
    Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
    David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
    Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
    linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
    Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
    Boris Pismenny <borisp@...dia.com>,
    John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
    Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: Bug in short splice to socket?

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> Do what I already suggested: making SPLICE_F_MORE reflect reality.

I'm trying to.  I need MSG_MORE to behave sensibly for what I want.

What I have signals SPLICE_F_MORE (and thus MSG_MORE) as long as we haven't
yet read enough data to fulfill the request - and will break out of the loop
if we get a zero-length read.

But this causes a change in behaviour because we then leave the protocol
having seen MSG_MORE set where it didn't previously see that.

This causes "tls -r tls.12_aes_gcm.multi_chunk_sendfile" on the TLS kselftest
to fail.

Now, if we're fine with the change in behaviour, I can make the selftest
observe the short sendfile() and cancel MSG_MORE itself - but that's just a
test program.

So that's the question: Do I have to maintain the current behaviour for the
short-splice case?

David