[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3132610.1687871361@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2023 14:09:21 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Is ->sendmsg() allowed to change the msghdr struct it is given?
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
> udp_sendmsg() can set the MSG_TRUNC bit in msg->msg_flags, so I guess
> that kind of actions are sort of allowed. Still, AFAICS, the kernel
> based msghdr is not copied back to the user-space, so such change
> should be almost a no-op in practice.
>
> @David: which would be the end goal for such action?
Various places in the kernel use sock_sendmsg() - and I've added a bunch more
with the MSG_SPLICE_PAGES patches. For some of the things I've added, there's
a loop which used to call ->sendpage() and now calls sock_sendmsg(). In most
of those places, msghdr will get reset each time round the loop - but not in
all cases.
Of particular immediate interest is net/ceph/messenger_v2.c. If you go to:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/3111635.1687813501@warthog.procyon.org.uk/
and look at the resultant code:
static int do_sendmsg(struct socket *sock, struct iov_iter *it)
{
struct msghdr msg = { .msg_flags = CEPH_MSG_FLAGS };
int ret;
msg.msg_iter = *it;
while (iov_iter_count(it)) {
ret = sock_sendmsg(sock, &msg);
if (ret <= 0) {
if (ret == -EAGAIN)
ret = 0;
return ret;
}
iov_iter_advance(it, ret);
}
WARN_ON(msg_data_left(&msg));
return 1;
}
for example. It could/would malfunction if sendmsg() is allowed to modify
msghdr - or if it doesn't update msg_iter. Likewise:
static int do_try_sendpage(struct socket *sock, struct iov_iter *it)
{
struct msghdr msg = { .msg_flags = CEPH_MSG_FLAGS };
struct bio_vec bv;
int ret;
if (WARN_ON(!iov_iter_is_bvec(it)))
return -EINVAL;
while (iov_iter_count(it)) {
/* iov_iter_iovec() for ITER_BVEC */
bvec_set_page(&bv, it->bvec->bv_page,
min(iov_iter_count(it),
it->bvec->bv_len - it->iov_offset),
it->bvec->bv_offset + it->iov_offset);
/*
* MSG_SPLICE_PAGES cannot properly handle pages with
* page_count == 0, we need to fall back to sendmsg if
* that's the case.
*
* Same goes for slab pages: skb_can_coalesce() allows
* coalescing neighboring slab objects into a single frag
* which triggers one of hardened usercopy checks.
*/
if (sendpage_ok(bv.bv_page))
msg.msg_flags |= MSG_SPLICE_PAGES;
else
msg.msg_flags &= ~MSG_SPLICE_PAGES;
iov_iter_bvec(&msg.msg_iter, ITER_SOURCE, &bv, 1, bv.bv_len);
ret = sock_sendmsg(sock, &msg);
if (ret <= 0) {
if (ret == -EAGAIN)
ret = 0;
return ret;
}
iov_iter_advance(it, ret);
}
return 1;
}
could be similarly affected if ->sendmsg() mucks about with msg_flags.
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists