Linux-MIPS Archive on
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Paul Burton <>
To: David Laight <>
Cc: "" <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Use __copy_{to,from}_user() for emulated FP loads/stores
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2019 07:40:48 -0800
Message-ID: <20191204154048.eotzglp4rdlx4yzl@lantea.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

Hi David,

On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 11:14:08AM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> From: Paul Burton
> > Sent: 03 December 2019 20:50
> > Our FPU emulator currently uses __get_user() & __put_user() to perform
> > emulated loads & stores. This is problematic because __get_user() &
> > __put_user() are only suitable for naturally aligned memory accesses,
> > and the address we're accessing is entirely under the control of
> > userland.
> > 
> > This allows userland to cause a kernel panic by simply performing an
> > unaligned floating point load or store - the kernel will handle the
> > address error exception by attempting to emulate the instruction, and in
> > the process it may generate another address error exception itself.
> > This time the exception is taken with EPC pointing at the kernels FPU
> > emulation code, and we hit a die_if_kernel() in
> > emulate_load_store_insn().
> Won't this be true of almost all code that uses get_user() and put_user()
> (with or without the leading __).

Only if the address being accessed is under the control of userland to
the extent that it can create an unaligned address. You're right that
may be more widespread though; it needs checking...

We used to have separate get_user_unaligned() & put_user_unaligned()
which would suggest that it's expected that get_user() & put_user()
require their accesses be aligned, but they were removed by commit
3170d8d226c2 ("kill {__,}{get,put}_user_unaligned()") in v4.13.

But perhaps we should just take the second AdEL exception & recover via
the fixups table. We definitely don't right now... Needs further

> > Fix this up by using __copy_from_user() instead of __get_user() and
> > __copy_to_user() instead of __put_user(). These replacements will handle
> > arbitrary alignment without problems.
> They'll also kill performance.....

Sure they're heavier, but if you're hitting the FPU emulator you're
already slow - trapping to the kernel for instruction emulation is
hardly a hot path. If you care about performance at all then this is
already a code path to avoid at all costs.


  reply index

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-03 20:49 Paul Burton
2019-12-04 11:14 ` David Laight
2019-12-04 15:40   ` Paul Burton [this message]
2019-12-04 16:18     ` David Laight

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20191204154048.eotzglp4rdlx4yzl@lantea.localdomain \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Linux-MIPS Archive on

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror linux-mips/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-mips linux-mips/ \
	public-inbox-index linux-mips

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:

AGPL code for this site: git clone