All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
	Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>,
	Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>,
	Parav Pandit <parav@nvidia.com>,
	Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
	linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: CFI violation in drivers/infiniband/core/sysfs.c
Date: Wed, 5 May 2021 19:39:56 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YJLYbCIKgLCZlcOv@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210505172916.GC2047089@ziepe.ca>

On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 02:29:16PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 06:26:06PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > They are in many places, for instance.
> > > 
> > > int device_create_file(struct device *dev,
> > >                        const struct device_attribute *attr)
> > > 
> > > We loose the type safety when working with attribute arrays, and
> > > people can just bypass the "proper" APIs to raw sysfs ones whenever
> > > they like.
> > > 
> > > It is fundamentally completely wrong to attach a 'struct
> > > kobject_attribute' to a 'struct device' kobject.
> > 
> > But it works because we are using C and we don't have RTTI :)
> >
> > Yes, it's horrid, but we do it because we "know" the real type that is
> > being called here.  That was an explicit design decision at the time.
> 
> I think it is beyond horrid. Just so everyone is clear on what is
> happening here..
> 
> RDMA has this:
> 
> struct hw_stats_attribute {
> 	struct attribute	attr;
> 	ssize_t	(*show)(struct kobject *kobj,
> 			struct attribute *attr, char *buf);
> 
> And it has two kobject types, a struct device kobject and a ib_port
> kobject.
> 
> When the user invokes show on the struct device sysfs we have this
> call path:
> 
> dev_sysfs_ops
>   dev_attr_show()
>     struct device_attribute *dev_attr = to_dev_attr(attr);
>       ret = dev_attr->show(dev, dev_attr, buf); 
>         show_hw_stats()
>           struct hw_stats_attribute *hsa = container_of(attr, struct hw_stats_attribute, attr)
> 
> And from the ib_port kobject we have this one:
> 
> port_sysfs_ops
>   port_attr_show()
>     struct port_attribute *port_attr =
>       container_of(attr, struct port_attribute, attr);
>        	return port_attr->show(p, port_attr, buf);
>           show_hw_stats()
>            struct hw_stats_attribute *hsa = container_of(attr, struct hw_stats_attribute, attr)
> 
> Then show_hw_stats() goes on to detect which call chain it uses so it
> can apply the proper container of to the kobj:

Wait, what?  That's not how any of this was designed, you should not be
"sharing" a callback of different types of objects, because:

> 
> 	if (!hsa->port_num)
> 		dev = container_of((struct device *)kobj,
> 				   struct ib_device, dev);
> 	else
> 		port = container_of(kobj, struct ib_port, kobj);

Yeah, ick.

No, that's not how this was designed or intended to be used.  Why not
just have 2 different show functions?

thanks,

greg k-h

  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-05 17:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-02 19:52 CFI violation in drivers/infiniband/core/sysfs.c Nathan Chancellor
2021-04-02 23:03 ` Kees Cook
2021-04-02 23:30   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-03  1:29     ` Kees Cook
2021-04-04 13:57       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-05 16:26         ` Greg KH
2021-05-05 17:29           ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-05 17:39             ` Greg KH [this message]
2021-04-03  6:55   ` Nathan Chancellor
2021-05-04 20:22     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-05 16:26       ` Greg KH
2021-05-05 20:08       ` Nathan Chancellor

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=YJLYbCIKgLCZlcOv@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=dledford@redhat.com \
    --cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=leon@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nathan@kernel.org \
    --cc=parav@nvidia.com \
    --cc=samitolvanen@google.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 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.