From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2019 18:07:50 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 01/12] lib: introduce copy_struct_{to,from}_user helpers Message-Id: <20190905180750.GQ1131@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> List-Id: References: <20190904201933.10736-1-cyphar@cyphar.com> <20190904201933.10736-2-cyphar@cyphar.com> In-Reply-To: <20190904201933.10736-2-cyphar@cyphar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Aleksa Sarai Cc: Jeff Layton , "J. Bruce Fields" , Arnd Bergmann , David Howells , Shuah Khan , Shuah Khan , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Christian Brauner , Rasmus Villemoes , Eric Biederman , Andy Lutomirski , Andrew Morton , Alexei Starovoitov , Kees Cook , Jann Horn , Tycho Andersen , David Drysdale , Chanho Min , Oleg Nesterov , Alexander On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 06:19:22AM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote: > +/* > + * "memset(p, 0, size)" but for user space buffers. Caller must have already > + * checked access_ok(p, size). > + */ > +static int __memzero_user(void __user *p, size_t s) > +{ > + const char zeros[BUFFER_SIZE] = {}; > + while (s > 0) { > + size_t n = min(s, sizeof(zeros)); > + > + if (__copy_to_user(p, zeros, n)) > + return -EFAULT; > + > + p += n; > + s -= n; > + } > + return 0; > +} That's called clear_user(). > +int copy_struct_to_user(void __user *dst, size_t usize, > + const void *src, size_t ksize) > +{ > + size_t size = min(ksize, usize); > + size_t rest = abs(ksize - usize); > + > + if (unlikely(usize > PAGE_SIZE)) > + return -EFAULT; Why? > + } else if (usize > ksize) { > + if (__memzero_user(dst + size, rest)) > + return -EFAULT; > + } > + /* Copy the interoperable parts of the struct. */ > + if (__copy_to_user(dst, src, size)) > + return -EFAULT; Why not simply clear_user() and copy_to_user()? > +int copy_struct_from_user(void *dst, size_t ksize, > + const void __user *src, size_t usize) > +{ > + size_t size = min(ksize, usize); > + size_t rest = abs(ksize - usize); Cute, but... you would be just as well without that 'rest' thing. > + > + if (unlikely(usize > PAGE_SIZE)) > + return -EFAULT; Again, why? > + if (unlikely(!access_ok(src, usize))) > + return -EFAULT; Why not simply copy_from_user() here? > + /* Deal with trailing bytes. */ > + if (usize < ksize) > + memset(dst + size, 0, rest); > + else if (usize > ksize) { > + const void __user *addr = src + size; > + char buffer[BUFFER_SIZE] = {}; > + > + while (rest > 0) { > + size_t bufsize = min(rest, sizeof(buffer)); > + > + if (__copy_from_user(buffer, addr, bufsize)) > + return -EFAULT; > + if (memchr_inv(buffer, 0, bufsize)) > + return -E2BIG; Frankly, that looks like a candidate for is_all_zeroes_user(). With the loop like above serving as a dumb default. And on badly alighed address it _will_ be dumb. Probably too much so - something like if ((unsigned long)addr & 1) { u8 v; if (get_user(v, (__u8 __user *)addr)) return -EFAULT; if (v) return -E2BIG; addr++; } if ((unsigned long)addr & 2) { u16 v; if (get_user(v, (__u16 __user *)addr)) return -EFAULT; if (v) return -E2BIG; addr +=2; } if ((unsigned long)addr & 4) { u32 v; if (get_user(v, (__u32 __user *)addr)) return -EFAULT; if (v) return -E2BIG; } would be saner, and things like x86 could trivially add an asm variant - it's not hard. Incidentally, memchr_inv() is an overkill in this case... From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C295C43331 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 18:08:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13A4620820 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 18:08:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2403851AbfIESIZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:08:25 -0400 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:39314 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726097AbfIESIY (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:08:24 -0400 Received: from viro by ZenIV.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.92.1 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1i5wAg-000437-LE; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 18:07:51 +0000 Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 19:07:50 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Aleksa Sarai Cc: Jeff Layton , "J. Bruce Fields" , Arnd Bergmann , David Howells , Shuah Khan , Shuah Khan , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Christian Brauner , Rasmus Villemoes , Eric Biederman , Andy Lutomirski , Andrew Morton , Alexei Starovoitov , Kees Cook , Jann Horn , Tycho Andersen , David Drysdale , Chanho Min , Oleg Nesterov , Alexander Shishkin , Jiri Olsa , Namhyung Kim , Aleksa Sarai , Linus Torvalds , containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 01/12] lib: introduce copy_struct_{to,from}_user helpers Message-ID: <20190905180750.GQ1131@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20190904201933.10736-1-cyphar@cyphar.com> <20190904201933.10736-2-cyphar@cyphar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190904201933.10736-2-cyphar@cyphar.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.0 (2019-05-25) Sender: linux-parisc-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 06:19:22AM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote: > +/* > + * "memset(p, 0, size)" but for user space buffers. Caller must have already > + * checked access_ok(p, size). > + */ > +static int __memzero_user(void __user *p, size_t s) > +{ > + const char zeros[BUFFER_SIZE] = {}; > + while (s > 0) { > + size_t n = min(s, sizeof(zeros)); > + > + if (__copy_to_user(p, zeros, n)) > + return -EFAULT; > + > + p += n; > + s -= n; > + } > + return 0; > +} That's called clear_user(). > +int copy_struct_to_user(void __user *dst, size_t usize, > + const void *src, size_t ksize) > +{ > + size_t size = min(ksize, usize); > + size_t rest = abs(ksize - usize); > + > + if (unlikely(usize > PAGE_SIZE)) > + return -EFAULT; Why? > + } else if (usize > ksize) { > + if (__memzero_user(dst + size, rest)) > + return -EFAULT; > + } > + /* Copy the interoperable parts of the struct. */ > + if (__copy_to_user(dst, src, size)) > + return -EFAULT; Why not simply clear_user() and copy_to_user()? > +int copy_struct_from_user(void *dst, size_t ksize, > + const void __user *src, size_t usize) > +{ > + size_t size = min(ksize, usize); > + size_t rest = abs(ksize - usize); Cute, but... you would be just as well without that 'rest' thing. > + > + if (unlikely(usize > PAGE_SIZE)) > + return -EFAULT; Again, why? > + if (unlikely(!access_ok(src, usize))) > + return -EFAULT; Why not simply copy_from_user() here? > + /* Deal with trailing bytes. */ > + if (usize < ksize) > + memset(dst + size, 0, rest); > + else if (usize > ksize) { > + const void __user *addr = src + size; > + char buffer[BUFFER_SIZE] = {}; > + > + while (rest > 0) { > + size_t bufsize = min(rest, sizeof(buffer)); > + > + if (__copy_from_user(buffer, addr, bufsize)) > + return -EFAULT; > + if (memchr_inv(buffer, 0, bufsize)) > + return -E2BIG; Frankly, that looks like a candidate for is_all_zeroes_user(). With the loop like above serving as a dumb default. And on badly alighed address it _will_ be dumb. Probably too much so - something like if ((unsigned long)addr & 1) { u8 v; if (get_user(v, (__u8 __user *)addr)) return -EFAULT; if (v) return -E2BIG; addr++; } if ((unsigned long)addr & 2) { u16 v; if (get_user(v, (__u16 __user *)addr)) return -EFAULT; if (v) return -E2BIG; addr +=2; } if ((unsigned long)addr & 4) { u32 v; if (get_user(v, (__u32 __user *)addr)) return -EFAULT; if (v) return -E2BIG; } would be saner, and things like x86 could trivially add an asm variant - it's not hard. Incidentally, memchr_inv() is an overkill in this case... From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 01/12] lib: introduce copy_struct_{to,from}_user helpers Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 19:07:50 +0100 Message-ID: <20190905180750.GQ1131@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20190904201933.10736-1-cyphar@cyphar.com> <20190904201933.10736-2-cyphar@cyphar.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190904201933.10736-2-cyphar@cyphar.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Aleksa Sarai Cc: Jeff Layton , "J. Bruce Fields" , Arnd Bergmann , David Howells , Shuah Khan , Shuah Khan , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Christian Brauner , Rasmus Villemoes , Eric Biederman , Andy Lutomirski , Andrew Morton , Alexei Starovoitov , Kees Cook , Jann Horn , Tycho Andersen , David Drysdale , Chanho Min , Oleg Nesterov , Alexander List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 06:19:22AM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote: > +/* > + * "memset(p, 0, size)" but for user space buffers. Caller must have already > + * checked access_ok(p, size). > + */ > +static int __memzero_user(void __user *p, size_t s) > +{ > + const char zeros[BUFFER_SIZE] = {}; > + while (s > 0) { > + size_t n = min(s, sizeof(zeros)); > + > + if (__copy_to_user(p, zeros, n)) > + return -EFAULT; > + > + p += n; > + s -= n; > + } > + return 0; > +} That's called clear_user(). > +int copy_struct_to_user(void __user *dst, size_t usize, > + const void *src, size_t ksize) > +{ > + size_t size = min(ksize, usize); > + size_t rest = abs(ksize - usize); > + > + if (unlikely(usize > PAGE_SIZE)) > + return -EFAULT; Why? > + } else if (usize > ksize) { > + if (__memzero_user(dst + size, rest)) > + return -EFAULT; > + } > + /* Copy the interoperable parts of the struct. */ > + if (__copy_to_user(dst, src, size)) > + return -EFAULT; Why not simply clear_user() and copy_to_user()? > +int copy_struct_from_user(void *dst, size_t ksize, > + const void __user *src, size_t usize) > +{ > + size_t size = min(ksize, usize); > + size_t rest = abs(ksize - usize); Cute, but... you would be just as well without that 'rest' thing. > + > + if (unlikely(usize > PAGE_SIZE)) > + return -EFAULT; Again, why? > + if (unlikely(!access_ok(src, usize))) > + return -EFAULT; Why not simply copy_from_user() here? > + /* Deal with trailing bytes. */ > + if (usize < ksize) > + memset(dst + size, 0, rest); > + else if (usize > ksize) { > + const void __user *addr = src + size; > + char buffer[BUFFER_SIZE] = {}; > + > + while (rest > 0) { > + size_t bufsize = min(rest, sizeof(buffer)); > + > + if (__copy_from_user(buffer, addr, bufsize)) > + return -EFAULT; > + if (memchr_inv(buffer, 0, bufsize)) > + return -E2BIG; Frankly, that looks like a candidate for is_all_zeroes_user(). With the loop like above serving as a dumb default. And on badly alighed address it _will_ be dumb. Probably too much so - something like if ((unsigned long)addr & 1) { u8 v; if (get_user(v, (__u8 __user *)addr)) return -EFAULT; if (v) return -E2BIG; addr++; } if ((unsigned long)addr & 2) { u16 v; if (get_user(v, (__u16 __user *)addr)) return -EFAULT; if (v) return -E2BIG; addr +=2; } if ((unsigned long)addr & 4) { u32 v; if (get_user(v, (__u32 __user *)addr)) return -EFAULT; if (v) return -E2BIG; } would be saner, and things like x86 could trivially add an asm variant - it's not hard. Incidentally, memchr_inv() is an overkill in this case... From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7978AC43331 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 18:10:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 29AEF20578 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 18:10:52 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 29AEF20578 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46PTJS1vkVzDr3N for ; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 04:10:48 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=ftp.linux.org.uk (client-ip=195.92.253.2; helo=zeniv.linux.org.uk; envelope-from=viro@ftp.linux.org.uk; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk Received: from ZenIV.linux.org.uk (zeniv.linux.org.uk [195.92.253.2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46PTFw6QcmzDqx2 for ; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 04:08:31 +1000 (AEST) Received: from viro by ZenIV.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.92.1 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1i5wAg-000437-LE; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 18:07:51 +0000 Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 19:07:50 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Aleksa Sarai Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 01/12] lib: introduce copy_struct_{to,from}_user helpers Message-ID: <20190905180750.GQ1131@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20190904201933.10736-1-cyphar@cyphar.com> <20190904201933.10736-2-cyphar@cyphar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190904201933.10736-2-cyphar@cyphar.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.0 (2019-05-25) X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Rasmus Villemoes , Alexei Starovoitov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Howells , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Jiri Olsa , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Tycho Andersen , Aleksa Sarai , Shuah Khan , Alexander Shishkin , Ingo Molnar , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, Kees Cook , Arnd Bergmann , Jann Horn , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, Andy Lutomirski , Shuah Khan , Namhyung Kim , David Drysdale , Christian Brauner , "J. Bruce Fields" , linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Chanho Min , Jeff Layton , Oleg Nesterov , Eric Biederman , linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , containers@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 06:19:22AM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote: > +/* > + * "memset(p, 0, size)" but for user space buffers. Caller must have already > + * checked access_ok(p, size). > + */ > +static int __memzero_user(void __user *p, size_t s) > +{ > + const char zeros[BUFFER_SIZE] = {}; > + while (s > 0) { > + size_t n = min(s, sizeof(zeros)); > + > + if (__copy_to_user(p, zeros, n)) > + return -EFAULT; > + > + p += n; > + s -= n; > + } > + return 0; > +} That's called clear_user(). > +int copy_struct_to_user(void __user *dst, size_t usize, > + const void *src, size_t ksize) > +{ > + size_t size = min(ksize, usize); > + size_t rest = abs(ksize - usize); > + > + if (unlikely(usize > PAGE_SIZE)) > + return -EFAULT; Why? > + } else if (usize > ksize) { > + if (__memzero_user(dst + size, rest)) > + return -EFAULT; > + } > + /* Copy the interoperable parts of the struct. */ > + if (__copy_to_user(dst, src, size)) > + return -EFAULT; Why not simply clear_user() and copy_to_user()? > +int copy_struct_from_user(void *dst, size_t ksize, > + const void __user *src, size_t usize) > +{ > + size_t size = min(ksize, usize); > + size_t rest = abs(ksize - usize); Cute, but... you would be just as well without that 'rest' thing. > + > + if (unlikely(usize > PAGE_SIZE)) > + return -EFAULT; Again, why? > + if (unlikely(!access_ok(src, usize))) > + return -EFAULT; Why not simply copy_from_user() here? > + /* Deal with trailing bytes. */ > + if (usize < ksize) > + memset(dst + size, 0, rest); > + else if (usize > ksize) { > + const void __user *addr = src + size; > + char buffer[BUFFER_SIZE] = {}; > + > + while (rest > 0) { > + size_t bufsize = min(rest, sizeof(buffer)); > + > + if (__copy_from_user(buffer, addr, bufsize)) > + return -EFAULT; > + if (memchr_inv(buffer, 0, bufsize)) > + return -E2BIG; Frankly, that looks like a candidate for is_all_zeroes_user(). With the loop like above serving as a dumb default. And on badly alighed address it _will_ be dumb. Probably too much so - something like if ((unsigned long)addr & 1) { u8 v; if (get_user(v, (__u8 __user *)addr)) return -EFAULT; if (v) return -E2BIG; addr++; } if ((unsigned long)addr & 2) { u16 v; if (get_user(v, (__u16 __user *)addr)) return -EFAULT; if (v) return -E2BIG; addr +=2; } if ((unsigned long)addr & 4) { u32 v; if (get_user(v, (__u32 __user *)addr)) return -EFAULT; if (v) return -E2BIG; } would be saner, and things like x86 could trivially add an asm variant - it's not hard. Incidentally, memchr_inv() is an overkill in this case... From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0117FC43331 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 18:08:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBA97206BA for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 18:08:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="JwD9z1V9" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org EBA97206BA Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=/ta3AzLQQxZLqBD2MYuJFCz2GmSp3HsEMgX1pydfnQ8=; b=JwD9z1V9RE941S 0Tna07gQZjHMUbNwoHuYx1Jjiw3UrDJPkeAxD3KBgFR/RPKxaKKnvjDW/i5hRB2TxR4JrbGfP3/eF X/RgHrM8M0Y5W6+21yAaHkZZwr2kJTFdnP6oo19pWd4ZCusnHVJMBw/vM5U3XKKQ00rUJ8K9eevwO /p34DF7Uf9oG+TntGuBdF6nmXh6qADumq3zbz9CMFtz9a9zTAhyAeCUuCEVYIhGH/UwJLSeU5g7Ez q2Tj3t3OqttqKlKhbSmRMZ/3BPNS6B8Uh4XbNYdWcRmOLb9olwXGntaPsEwGVeQ4vI1bviBSQQa/t paYEANmhEUyzHAvdF9Fw==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1i5wBK-0004jw-UM; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 18:08:30 +0000 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1i5wBH-0004ie-Iy for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 18:08:29 +0000 Received: from viro by ZenIV.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.92.1 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1i5wAg-000437-LE; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 18:07:51 +0000 Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 19:07:50 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Aleksa Sarai Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 01/12] lib: introduce copy_struct_{to,from}_user helpers Message-ID: <20190905180750.GQ1131@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20190904201933.10736-1-cyphar@cyphar.com> <20190904201933.10736-2-cyphar@cyphar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190904201933.10736-2-cyphar@cyphar.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.0 (2019-05-25) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190905_110827_630905_8E180734 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 12.62 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Rasmus Villemoes , Alexei Starovoitov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Howells , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Jiri Olsa , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Tycho Andersen , Aleksa Sarai , Shuah Khan , Alexander Shishkin , Ingo Molnar , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, Kees Cook , Arnd Bergmann , Jann Horn , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, Andy Lutomirski , Shuah Khan , Namhyung Kim , David Drysdale , Christian Brauner , "J. Bruce Fields" , linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Chanho Min , Jeff Layton , Oleg Nesterov , Eric Biederman , linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , containers@lists.linux-foundation.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 06:19:22AM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote: > +/* > + * "memset(p, 0, size)" but for user space buffers. Caller must have already > + * checked access_ok(p, size). > + */ > +static int __memzero_user(void __user *p, size_t s) > +{ > + const char zeros[BUFFER_SIZE] = {}; > + while (s > 0) { > + size_t n = min(s, sizeof(zeros)); > + > + if (__copy_to_user(p, zeros, n)) > + return -EFAULT; > + > + p += n; > + s -= n; > + } > + return 0; > +} That's called clear_user(). > +int copy_struct_to_user(void __user *dst, size_t usize, > + const void *src, size_t ksize) > +{ > + size_t size = min(ksize, usize); > + size_t rest = abs(ksize - usize); > + > + if (unlikely(usize > PAGE_SIZE)) > + return -EFAULT; Why? > + } else if (usize > ksize) { > + if (__memzero_user(dst + size, rest)) > + return -EFAULT; > + } > + /* Copy the interoperable parts of the struct. */ > + if (__copy_to_user(dst, src, size)) > + return -EFAULT; Why not simply clear_user() and copy_to_user()? > +int copy_struct_from_user(void *dst, size_t ksize, > + const void __user *src, size_t usize) > +{ > + size_t size = min(ksize, usize); > + size_t rest = abs(ksize - usize); Cute, but... you would be just as well without that 'rest' thing. > + > + if (unlikely(usize > PAGE_SIZE)) > + return -EFAULT; Again, why? > + if (unlikely(!access_ok(src, usize))) > + return -EFAULT; Why not simply copy_from_user() here? > + /* Deal with trailing bytes. */ > + if (usize < ksize) > + memset(dst + size, 0, rest); > + else if (usize > ksize) { > + const void __user *addr = src + size; > + char buffer[BUFFER_SIZE] = {}; > + > + while (rest > 0) { > + size_t bufsize = min(rest, sizeof(buffer)); > + > + if (__copy_from_user(buffer, addr, bufsize)) > + return -EFAULT; > + if (memchr_inv(buffer, 0, bufsize)) > + return -E2BIG; Frankly, that looks like a candidate for is_all_zeroes_user(). With the loop like above serving as a dumb default. And on badly alighed address it _will_ be dumb. Probably too much so - something like if ((unsigned long)addr & 1) { u8 v; if (get_user(v, (__u8 __user *)addr)) return -EFAULT; if (v) return -E2BIG; addr++; } if ((unsigned long)addr & 2) { u16 v; if (get_user(v, (__u16 __user *)addr)) return -EFAULT; if (v) return -E2BIG; addr +=2; } if ((unsigned long)addr & 4) { u32 v; if (get_user(v, (__u32 __user *)addr)) return -EFAULT; if (v) return -E2BIG; } would be saner, and things like x86 could trivially add an asm variant - it's not hard. Incidentally, memchr_inv() is an overkill in this case... _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel