From: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>
To: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
Cc: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
Daniel Colascione <dancol@google.com>,
Aleksa Sarai <asarai@suse.de>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws>,
linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
David Drysdale <drysdale@google.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org,
Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
Chanho Min <chanho.min@lge.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v11 7/8] open: openat2(2) syscall
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 23:19:04 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190829131904.bkbalbtqt6j3gwcp@yavin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <899401fa-ff0a-2ce9-8826-09904efab2d2@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3601 bytes --]
On 2019-08-29, Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> wrote:
> On 29/08/2019 14.15, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
> > On 2019-08-24, Daniel Colascione <dancol@google.com> wrote:
>
> >> Why pad the structure when new functionality (perhaps accommodated via
> >> a larger structure) could be signaled by passing a new flag? Adding
> >> reserved fields to a structure with a size embedded in the ABI makes a
> >> lot of sense --- e.g., pthread_mutex_t can't grow. But this structure
> >> can grow, so the reservation seems needless to me.
> >
> > Quite a few folks have said that ->reserved is either unnecessary or
> > too big. I will be changing this, though I am not clear what the best
> > way of extending the structure is. If anyone has a strong opinion on
> > this (or an alternative to the ones listed below), please chime in. I
> > don't have any really strong attachment to this aspect of the API.
> >
> > There appear to be a few ways we can do it (that all have precedence
> > with other syscalls):
> >
> > 1. Use O_* flags to indicate extensions.
> > 2. A separate "version" field that is incremented when we change.
> > 3. Add a size_t argument to openat2(2).
> > 4. Reserve space (as in this patchset).
> >
> > (My personal preference would be (3), followed closely by (2).)
>
> 3, definitely, and instead of having to invent a new scheme for every
> new syscall, make that the default pattern by providing a helper
Sure (though hopefully I don't need to immediately go and refactor all
the existing size_t syscalls). I will be presenting about this patchset
at the containers microconference at LPC (in a few weeks), so I'll hold
of on any API-related rewrites until after that.
> int __copy_abi_struct(void *kernel, size_t ksize, const void __user
> *user, size_t usize)
> {
> size_t copy = min(ksize, usize);
>
> if (copy_from_user(kernel, user, copy))
> return -EFAULT;
>
> if (usize > ksize) {
> /* maybe a separate "return user_is_zero(user + ksize, usize -
> ksize);" helper */
> char c;
> user += ksize;
> usize -= ksize;
> while (usize--) {
> if (get_user(c, user++))
> return -EFAULT;
> if (c)
> return -EINVAL;
This part would probably be better done with memchr_inv() and
copy_from_user() (and probably should put an upper limit on usize), but
I get what you mean.
> }
> } else if (ksize > usize) {
> memset(kernel + usize, 0, ksize - usize);
> }
> return 0;
> }
> #define copy_abi_struct(kernel, user, usize) \
> __copy_abi_struct(kernel, sizeof(*kernel), user, usize)
>
> > Both (1) and (2) have the problem that the "struct version" is inside
> > the struct so we'd need to copy_from_user() twice. This isn't the end of
> > the world, it just feels a bit less clean than is ideal. (3) fixes that
> > problem, at the cost of making the API slightly more cumbersome to use
> > directly (though again glibc could wrap that away).
>
> I don't see how 3 is cumbersome to use directly. Userspace code does
> struct openat_of_the_day args = {.field1 = x, .field3 = y} and passes
> &args, sizeof(args). What does glibc need to do beyond its usual munging
> of the userspace ABI registers to the syscall ABI registers?
I'd argue that
ret = openat2(AT_FDCWD, "foo", &how, sizeof(how)); // (3)
is slightly less pretty than
ret = openat2(AT_FDCWD, "foo", &how); // (1), (2), (4)
But it's not really that bad. Forget I said anything.
--
Aleksa Sarai
Senior Software Engineer (Containers)
SUSE Linux GmbH
<https://www.cyphar.com/>
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 176 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-29 13:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-20 3:33 [PATCH RESEND v11 0/8] openat2(2) Aleksa Sarai
2019-08-20 3:33 ` [PATCH RESEND v11 1/8] namei: obey trailing magic-link DAC permissions Aleksa Sarai
2019-08-20 3:34 ` [PATCH RESEND v11 2/8] procfs: switch magic-link modes to be more sane Aleksa Sarai
2019-08-20 3:34 ` [PATCH RESEND v11 3/8] open: O_EMPTYPATH: procfs-less file descriptor re-opening Aleksa Sarai
2019-08-20 3:34 ` [PATCH RESEND v11 4/8] namei: O_BENEATH-style path resolution flags Aleksa Sarai
2019-08-20 3:34 ` [PATCH RESEND v11 5/8] namei: LOOKUP_IN_ROOT: chroot-like path resolution Aleksa Sarai
2019-08-20 3:34 ` [PATCH RESEND v11 6/8] namei: aggressively check for nd->root escape on ".." resolution Aleksa Sarai
2019-08-20 3:34 ` [PATCH RESEND v11 7/8] open: openat2(2) syscall Aleksa Sarai
2019-08-24 20:17 ` Daniel Colascione
2019-08-29 12:15 ` Aleksa Sarai
2019-08-29 13:05 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-08-29 13:19 ` Aleksa Sarai [this message]
2019-08-26 19:50 ` sbaugh
2019-08-28 15:55 ` Jeff Layton
2019-08-28 20:17 ` Spencer Baugh
2019-08-20 3:34 ` [PATCH RESEND v11 8/8] selftests: add openat2(2) selftests Aleksa Sarai
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=20190829131904.bkbalbtqt6j3gwcp@yavin \
--to=cyphar@cyphar.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=asarai@suse.de \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=chanho.min@lge.com \
--cc=christian@brauner.io \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dancol@google.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=drysdale@google.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org \
--cc=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=tycho@tycho.ws \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).