All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] raw_copy_from_user() semantics
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2020 12:34:11 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wirA7zJJB17KJPCE-V9pKwn8VKxXTeiaM+F+Sa1Xd2SWA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wi7f5vG+s=aFsskzcTRs+f7MVHK9yJFZtUEfndy6ScKRQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 12:28 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> I think we should try to get rid of the exact semantics.

Side note: I think one of the historical reasons for the exact
semantics was that we used to do things like the mount option copying
with a "copy_from_user()" iirc.

And that could take a fault at the end of the stack etc, because
"copy_mount_options()" is nasty and doesn't get a size, and just
copies "up to 4kB" of data.

It's a mistake in the interface, but it is what it is. But we've
always handled the inexact count there anyway by originally doing byte
accesses, and at some point you optimized it to just look at where
page boundaries might be..

I think that was the only truly _valid_ case of "we actually copy data
from user space, and we might need to handle a partial case", and
exactly because of that, it had already long avoided the whole "assume
copy_from_user gives us byte-accurate data before the fault".

              Linus

  reply	other threads:[~2020-07-19 19:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-19  3:17 [RFC] raw_copy_from_user() semantics Al Viro
2020-07-19 19:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-07-19 19:34   ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2020-07-22 11:37     ` Catalin Marinas
2020-07-22 13:14       ` David Laight
2020-07-22 16:53         ` Catalin Marinas
2020-07-23  8:37           ` David Laight
2020-07-23 10:18             ` Catalin Marinas
2020-07-23 10:34               ` David Laight

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-=wirA7zJJB17KJPCE-V9pKwn8VKxXTeiaM+F+Sa1Xd2SWA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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.