From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Jordy Zomer <jordy@pwning.systems>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] secretmem: Prevent secretmem_users from wrapping to zero
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2021 14:17:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgvb72urgEM5q_SpXFv1OXnDGY8VFs8QmZPt9_n1bH0CQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202110251402.ADFA4D41BF@keescook>
On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 2:04 PM Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> Is secretmem different? We're trying to count how many of these we have,
> this is a common pattern in, for example, the network code which does
> this kind of thing a lot.
Yes, secretmem is different.
A refcount being zero means that the data it referenced no longer exists.
That's not what the secretmem counter meant at all.
Making it a refcount was simply WRONG. It's not a refcount, it's a
usage count, and the fact that syzbot caught the warning just shows
how wrong it was.
Stop arguing for garbage. It was wrong, just admit it. The semantics
for "refcount" is something else than what that code had. As a result,
it got reverted. I've applied Willy's patch that actually makes sense.
Arguing for garbage in the name of "security" is still garbage. In
fact, it only causes confusion, and as such is likely to result in
problems - including security problems - later.
Because confusion about semantics is bad. And that was what that patch was.
And I want to state - again - how dangerous this "refcounts are always
prefereable to atomics" mental model is. Refcounts are _not_
fundamentally preferable to atomics. They are slower, bigger, and have
completely different semantics.
So if something isn't a refcount, it damn well shouldn't use "refcount_t".
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-25 21:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-25 18:16 [PATCH] secretmem: Prevent secretmem_users from wrapping to zero Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
2021-10-25 19:29 ` Kees Cook
2021-10-25 19:51 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-10-25 21:04 ` Kees Cook
2021-10-25 21:17 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2021-10-25 22:30 ` Kees Cook
2021-10-25 23:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-10-26 0:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-10-26 0:17 ` Kees Cook
2021-10-26 1:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-10-26 1:34 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-10-31 1:42 ` kernel test robot
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='CAHk-=wgvb72urgEM5q_SpXFv1OXnDGY8VFs8QmZPt9_n1bH0CQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jordy@pwning.systems \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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.