All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: 'Al Viro' <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCHES] uaccess simple access_ok() removals
Date: Sun, 10 May 2020 14:34:04 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <847a5160e4e64a82962dc1531cd52e11@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200509234124.GM23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>

From: Al Viro
> Sent: 10 May 2020 00:41
> 
> 	One of the uaccess-related branches; this one is just the
> cases when access_ok() calls are trivially pointless - the address
> in question gets fed only to primitives that do access_ok() checks
> themselves.

There is also the check in rw_copy_check_uvector() that should
always be replicated by the copy_to/from_user() in _copy_to/from_iter().

And the strange call to rw_copy_check_uvector() in mm/process_vm_access.c
which carefully avoids the access_ok() check for the target process.
I did a quick look, but failed to see an obvious check further
down the call path.
The code is doing a read/write from another process, not sure when it
is used - not by gdb.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)


      parent reply	other threads:[~2020-05-10 14:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-09 23:41 [PATCHES] uaccess simple access_ok() removals Al Viro
2020-05-09 23:45 ` [PATCH 01/20] dlmfs_file_write(): get rid of pointless access_ok() Al Viro
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 02/20] fat_dir_ioctl(): hadn't needed that access_ok() for more than a decade Al Viro
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 03/20] btrfs_ioctl_send(): don't bother with access_ok() Al Viro
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 04/20] FIEMAP: " Al Viro
2020-05-10  7:02     ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-05-13 19:02       ` Al Viro
2020-05-13 19:38         ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-05-29 15:01           ` Al Viro
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 05/20] tomoyo_write_control(): get rid of pointless access_ok() Al Viro
2020-05-10  0:50     ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-05-10  0:57       ` Linus Torvalds
2020-05-10  1:04         ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-05-10  3:01         ` Al Viro
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 06/20] n_hdlc_tty_read(): remove " Al Viro
2020-05-15 10:53     ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 07/20] nvram: drop useless access_ok() Al Viro
2020-05-15 10:54     ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 08/20] cm4000_cs.c cmm_ioctl(): get rid of pointless access_ok() Al Viro
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 09/20] drivers/fpga/dfl-fme-pr.c: " Al Viro
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 10/20] drivers/fpga/dfl-afu-dma-region.c: " Al Viro
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 11/20] amifb: get rid of pointless access_ok() calls Al Viro
2020-05-14 13:45     ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2020-05-14 14:07       ` Al Viro
2020-05-14 14:25         ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2020-05-14 17:41           ` Al Viro
2020-05-14 20:21             ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 12/20] omapfb: " Al Viro
2020-05-14 13:39     ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 13/20] drivers/crypto/ccp/sev-dev.c: get rid of pointless access_ok() Al Viro
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 14/20] via-pmu: don't bother with access_ok() Al Viro
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 15/20] drm_read(): get rid of pointless access_ok() Al Viro
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 16/20] efi_test: " Al Viro
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 17/20] lpfc_debugfs: " Al Viro
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 18/20] usb: get rid of pointless access_ok() calls Al Viro
2020-05-15 10:53     ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 19/20] hfi1: get rid of pointless access_ok() Al Viro
2020-05-09 23:45   ` [PATCH 4/4] vmci_host: " Al Viro
2020-05-15 10:53     ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2020-05-10  0:34 ` [PATCHES] uaccess simple access_ok() removals Linus Torvalds
2020-05-10  3:27   ` Al Viro
2020-05-10 14:34 ` David Laight [this message]

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=847a5160e4e64a82962dc1531cd52e11@AcuMS.aculab.com \
    --to=david.laight@aculab.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.