All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arnaud POULIQUEN <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
To: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
	Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>,
	<linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] rpmsg: ctrl: Add check on rpmsg device removability from user space
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 10:02:14 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e4310ebf-4605-0462-e13b-0451ce19eea3@foss.st.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210616171524.GA637642@p14s>

Hello Mathieu,

On 6/16/21 7:15 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 11:30:51AM +0200, Arnaud POULIQUEN wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 6/15/21 7:46 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 11:14:05AM +0200, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote:
>>>> Using the RPMSG_RELEASE_DEV_IOCTL is possible to remove any
>>>> rpmsg device (such as the rpmsg ns or the rpmsg ctrldev).
>>>>
>>>> Add a new field to store the removability of the device.
>>>>
>>>> By default the rpmsg device can not be removed by user space. It is
>>>> set to 1 by the rpmsg ctrl on RPMSG_CREATE_DEV_IOCTL request, but
>>>> could also be set by an rpmsg driver during probe.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_ctrl.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
>>>>  include/linux/rpmsg.h      |  2 ++
>>>>  2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_ctrl.c b/drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_ctrl.c
>>>> index cb19e32d05e1..e93c6ec49038 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_ctrl.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_ctrl.c
>>>> @@ -74,6 +74,7 @@ static long rpmsg_ctrldev_ioctl(struct file *fp, unsigned int cmd,
>>>>  	struct rpmsg_endpoint_info eptinfo;
>>>>  	struct rpmsg_channel_info chinfo;
>>>>  	struct rpmsg_device *rpdev;
>>>> +	struct device *dev;
>>>>  	int ret = 0;
>>>>  
>>>>  	if (copy_from_user(&eptinfo, argp, sizeof(eptinfo)))
>>>> @@ -95,11 +96,25 @@ static long rpmsg_ctrldev_ioctl(struct file *fp, unsigned int cmd,
>>>>  		if (!rpdev) {
>>>>  			dev_err(&ctrldev->dev, "failed to create %s channel\n", chinfo.name);
>>>>  			ret = -ENXIO;
>>>> +		} else {
>>>> +			/* Allow user space to release the device. */
>>>> +			rpdev->us_removable = 1;
>>>
>>> As a rule of thumb I try really hard to avoid introducing new flags.  In this case we
>>> can attain the same result by looking at chinfo->name, chinfo->src and
>>> chinfo->dst.  I would introduce a new inline function in rpmsg_internal.h,
>>> something like rpmsg_chrdev_is_ctrl_dev(), and compare the specifics in chinfo
>>> to rpdev->id.name, rpdev->src and rpdev->dst.  If they all match then the
>>> operation is refused.
>>
>> Something must have escaped me, because i turn around your your proposal,
>> without understand it.
>>
>> The "us_removable" flag is not only for the rpmsg_ctrl, but for any rpmsg device
>> that have not to be released by user application. Either because there are core
>> ( rpmsg_ctrl, rpmsg_ns) or because a rpmsg driver don't allow to unbind its
>> rpmsg devices.
>>
> 
> I don't see how the current patch would allow a driver to prevent user space
> from releasing a rpmsg device since the sysfs attribute can be changed at will.
> So even if the driver sets the flag user space can still revert it.


The patch [4/4] define the a read only attribute using the rpmsg_show_attr
declaration[1]. So the userspace can't change it.

This also has the advantage of not allowing the new IOCTRL API to be used by
default for legacy RPMSg devices without a specific patch.

[1] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_core.c#L362

> 
>> look to me that rpmsg_chrdev_is_ctrl_dev just prevents rpmsg ctrl to be released
>> by the RPMSG_RELEASE_DEV_IOCTL.
> 
> That is correct.  I did not address rpmsg_ns to keep things simple but it would
> also have to be handled properly.
> 
>>
>> Please, could you clarify what you have in mind here?
> 
> Other than rpmsg_ctrl and rpmsg_ns I don't think we should introduce any
> mechanism to prevent users from releasing an rpmsg.  Doing so needs root access
> - if a user space process with root privileges can't be trusted then we have
> bigger problems than unwanted releases of registered rpmsg devices.

That's make sense. If we go on this way we could also trust the root application
for the rpmsg_ns and only protect the rpmsg_ctrl which can not release itself,
as you proposed.

Thanks,

Arnaud

> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Arnaud
>>
>>>
>>> That way we don't introduce a new flag and there is also no need to call
>>> rpmsg_find_device() twice.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mathieu
>>>
>>>>  		}
>>>>  		break;
>>>>  
>>>>  	case RPMSG_RELEASE_DEV_IOCTL:
>>>> -		ret = rpmsg_release_channel(ctrldev->rpdev, &chinfo);
>>>> +		dev = rpmsg_find_device(ctrldev->rpdev->dev.parent, &chinfo);
>>>> +		if (!dev)
>>>> +			ret =  -ENXIO;
>>>> +
>>>> +		/* Verify that rpmsg device removal is allowed. */
>>>> +		if (!ret) {
>>>> +			rpdev = to_rpmsg_device(dev);
>>>> +			if (!rpdev->us_removable)
>>>> +				ret = -EACCES;
>>>> +		}
>>>> +		if (!ret)
>>>> +			ret = rpmsg_release_channel(ctrldev->rpdev, &chinfo);
>>>>  		if (ret)
>>>>  			dev_err(&ctrldev->dev, "failed to release %s channel (%d)\n",
>>>>  				chinfo.name, ret);
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/rpmsg.h b/include/linux/rpmsg.h
>>>> index d97dcd049f18..3642aad1a789 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/rpmsg.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/rpmsg.h
>>>> @@ -47,6 +47,7 @@ struct rpmsg_channel_info {
>>>>   * @ept: the rpmsg endpoint of this channel
>>>>   * @announce: if set, rpmsg will announce the creation/removal of this channel
>>>>   * @little_endian: True if transport is using little endian byte representation
>>>> + * @us_removable: True if userspace application has permission to remove the rpmsg device
>>>>   */
>>>>  struct rpmsg_device {
>>>>  	struct device dev;
>>>> @@ -57,6 +58,7 @@ struct rpmsg_device {
>>>>  	struct rpmsg_endpoint *ept;
>>>>  	bool announce;
>>>>  	bool little_endian;
>>>> +	bool us_removable;
>>>>  
>>>>  	const struct rpmsg_device_ops *ops;
>>>>  };
>>>> -- 
>>>> 2.17.1
>>>>

  reply	other threads:[~2021-06-17  8:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-06-04  9:14 [PATCH 0/4] rpmsg: ctrl: Add ability to instantiate rpmsg device locally Arnaud Pouliquen
2021-06-04  9:14 ` [PATCH 1/4] rpmsg: ctrl: Introduce RPMSG_CREATE_DEV_IOCTL Arnaud Pouliquen
2021-06-15 17:53   ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-06-16  8:12     ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2021-06-21  9:35       ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2021-06-04  9:14 ` [PATCH 2/4] rpmsg: ctrl: Introduce RPMSG_RELEASE_DEV_IOCTL Arnaud Pouliquen
2021-06-15 17:38   ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-06-16  8:13     ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2021-06-04  9:14 ` [PATCH 3/4] rpmsg: ctrl: Add check on rpmsg device removability from user space Arnaud Pouliquen
2021-06-15 17:46   ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-06-16  9:30     ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2021-06-16 17:15       ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-06-17  8:02         ` Arnaud POULIQUEN [this message]
2021-06-17 16:55           ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2021-06-17 16:56           ` Mathieu Poirier
2021-06-04  9:14 ` [PATCH 4/4] rpmsg: Add a removable attribute to the rpmsg device Arnaud Pouliquen
2021-06-15 17:48   ` Mathieu Poirier

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=e4310ebf-4605-0462-e13b-0451ce19eea3@foss.st.com \
    --to=arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com \
    --cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com \
    --cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
    --cc=ohad@wizery.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.