linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
To: cmllamas@google.com
Cc: aliceryhl@google.com, arve@android.com, brauner@kernel.org,
	 gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, joel@joelfernandes.org,
	kernel-team@android.com,  linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	maco@android.com, surenb@google.com,  tkjos@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] binder: introduce BINDER_SET_PROC_FLAGS ioctl
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 08:34:47 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240418083447.3877366-1-aliceryhl@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240417191418.1341988-2-cmllamas@google.com>

Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@google.com> writes:
> This new ioctl enables userspace to control the individual behavior of
> the 'struct binder_proc' instance via flags. The driver validates and
> returns the supported subset. Some existing ioctls are migrated to use
> these flags in subsequent commits.
> 
> Suggested-by: Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@android.com>
> Signed-off-by: Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@google.com>
> ---
>  drivers/android/binder.c            | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/android/binder_internal.h   |  4 +++-
>  include/uapi/linux/android/binder.h |  6 ++++++
>  3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/android/binder.c b/drivers/android/binder.c
> index bad28cf42010..e0d193bfb237 100644
> --- a/drivers/android/binder.c
> +++ b/drivers/android/binder.c
> @@ -5334,6 +5334,26 @@ static int binder_ioctl_get_extended_error(struct binder_thread *thread,
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +static int binder_ioctl_set_proc_flags(struct binder_proc *proc,
> +				       u32 __user *user)
> +{
> +	u32 flags;
> +
> +	if (get_user(flags, user))
> +		return -EFAULT;
> +
> +	binder_inner_proc_lock(proc);
> +	flags &= PF_SUPPORTED_FLAGS_MASK;
> +	proc->flags = flags;
> +	binder_inner_proc_unlock(proc);
> +
> +	/* confirm supported flags with user */
> +	if (put_user(flags, user))
> +		return -EFAULT;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

I'm just thinking out loud here, but is this the best API for this
ioctl? Using this API, if I want to toggle the oneway-spam-detection
flag, then I can't do so without knowing the value of all other flags,
and I also need to synchronize all calls to this ioctl.

That's fine for the current use-case where these flags are only set
during startup, but are we confident that no future flag will be toggled
while a process is active?

How about these alternatives?

1. Userspace passes two masks, one containing bits to set, and another
   containing bits to unset. Userspace returns new value of flags. (If
   the same bit is set in both masks, we can fail with EINVAL.)

2. Compare and swap. Userspace passes the expected previous value and
   the desired new value. The kernel returns the actual previous value
   and updates it only if userspace gave the right previous value.

3. Set or unset only. Userspace passes a boolean and a mask. Boolean
   determines whether userspace wants to set or unset the bits set in
   the mask.

I don't know what the usual kernel convention is for this kind of
ioctl, so I'm happy with whatever you all think is best.

Alice

  reply	other threads:[~2024-04-18  8:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-04-17 19:13 [PATCH 0/4] binder: optimize handle generation logic Carlos Llamas
2024-04-17 19:13 ` [PATCH 1/4] binder: introduce BINDER_SET_PROC_FLAGS ioctl Carlos Llamas
2024-04-18  8:34   ` Alice Ryhl [this message]
2024-04-20 23:39     ` Carlos Llamas
2024-04-22  8:56       ` Alice Ryhl
2024-04-22 22:48         ` Carlos Llamas
2024-04-23  8:18           ` Alice Ryhl
2024-04-17 19:13 ` [PATCH 2/4] binder: migrate ioctl to new PF_SPAM_DETECTION Carlos Llamas
2024-04-18  8:12   ` Alice Ryhl
2024-04-20 23:49     ` Carlos Llamas
2024-04-22  8:52       ` Alice Ryhl
2024-04-22 22:24         ` Carlos Llamas
2024-04-17 19:13 ` [PATCH 3/4] binder: add support for PF_LARGE_HANDLES Carlos Llamas
2024-04-18  8:21   ` Alice Ryhl
2024-04-17 19:13 ` [PATCH 4/4] binder: fix max_thread type inconsistency Carlos Llamas
2024-04-18  4:40   ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2024-04-21  0:00     ` Carlos Llamas
2024-04-21  6:39       ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2024-04-21 17:48         ` Carlos Llamas

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20240418083447.3877366-1-aliceryhl@google.com \
    --to=aliceryhl@google.com \
    --cc=arve@android.com \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=cmllamas@google.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@android.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maco@android.com \
    --cc=surenb@google.com \
    --cc=tkjos@android.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).