From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EEC4C433ED for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 03:01:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D154613B1 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 03:01:12 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4D154613B1 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=chromium.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id E08776B0071; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 23:01:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id DB9AF6B0075; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 23:01:11 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id C0B126B007B; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 23:01:11 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0097.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.97]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A003E6B0071 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 23:01:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin08.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 647D82E6F7D for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 03:01:11 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78029471142.08.312B05C Received: from mail-pg1-f169.google.com (mail-pg1-f169.google.com [209.85.215.169]) by imf11.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B303200027E for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 03:01:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pg1-f169.google.com with SMTP id f29so13384178pgm.8 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 20:01:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=TAR5yqsN9HoAFUY9r76iY0/Z55yb+yClu81GmGqClH8=; b=AxctJN4YKisiNN3mi+jR9a4PjDrVydjLyKAjdhLsmYrQmMrpv2qEobv2Nvyg0HNTWx 7szvLEm1gEw15HdvEMw40HI+RO95vOD0oLwcO6a8e7OFu4XSukj3DnnIKTZ8dpsRwLw0 podg0eVzOhWXD4N6oDRZgcgEPZIKqHA6fEZeU= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=TAR5yqsN9HoAFUY9r76iY0/Z55yb+yClu81GmGqClH8=; b=qLX6io2awqZZAvptGQ8/0wtzqC/TnFTSuGtUxpDdGo/06UQ8FYz84emPpM49fMQMXq rU2BczPDaqHJz+VfMNRE5BrhgT8xQG8VH1Gi+ctmzoKSa3A+yOQ04SuQaLxe1ON0QWFN kDRSJIdujXsnvhJBei2WmO+/Ng9/CvnOpKlvFgSj+hnoPlZ7v+TgUYnhdREx1typ4KEE kiHh5e/4i8HkOvXMM6uNhrqrcHf5JCdtdLR2MTes8hD4eHtSqcVuXYNoLka/b2VPQJl0 JCda8ZvkecXU7HLKsloHkAilagOhbhTii9ZKktqJkP7dSWrvIA5GEEX7vkwbjB2ja1yU /3Fg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5326P7Q49PKvN6639bpy1clsCIalNpQqT5uQYvqTnzM5bn8KPvcG hSkMCCN9/I1raSIXO+/eieEVJw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxny0HhvRRvjLB4ExxpMb0WRmAlIu/+/yKctZz3k66U0emA0Hktzp0YxGEbXWZI5dhhte4d4Q== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:796:b029:247:7a27:d612 with SMTP id g22-20020a056a000796b02902477a27d612mr22006953pfu.78.1618369269985; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 20:01:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c128sm13632751pfb.81.2021.04.13.20.01.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 13 Apr 2021 20:01:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 20:01:08 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com, jgross@suse.com, sstabellini@kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, jani.nikula@linux.intel.com, joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com, rodrigo.vivi@intel.com, chris@chris-wilson.co.uk, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, hch@lst.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] mm: Introduce verify_page_range() Message-ID: <202104131935.B5EBDAE@keescook> References: <20210412080012.357146277@infradead.org> <20210412080611.769864829@infradead.org> <202104121302.57D7EF8@keescook> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 0B303200027E X-Stat-Signature: csy38xdn4yunajczqebjgc16zrmen3ou Received-SPF: none (chromium.org>: No applicable sender policy available) receiver=imf11; identity=mailfrom; envelope-from=""; helo=mail-pg1-f169.google.com; client-ip=209.85.215.169 X-HE-DKIM-Result: pass/pass X-HE-Tag: 1618369261-128513 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 09:36:32AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 01:05:09PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 10:00:16AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > +struct vpr_data { > > > + int (*fn)(pte_t pte, unsigned long addr, void *data); > > > + void *data; > > > +}; > > > > Eeerg. This is likely to become an attack target itself. Stored function > > pointer with stored (3rd) argument. > > > > This doesn't seem needed: only DRM uses it, and that's for error > > reporting. I'd rather plumb back errors in a way to not have to add > > another place in the kernel where we do func+arg stored calling. > > Is this any better? It does have the stored pointer, but not a stored > argument, assuming you don't count returns as arguments I suppose. It's better in the sense that it's not the func/arg pair that really bugs me, yes. :) > The alternative is refactoring apply_to_page_range() :-/ Yeah, I'm looking now, I see what you mean. > --- > > struct vpr_data { > bool (*fn)(pte_t pte, unsigned long addr); > unsigned long addr; > }; > > static int vpr_fn(pte_t *pte, unsigned long addr, void *data) > { > struct vpr_data *vpr = data; > if (!vpr->fn(*pte, addr)) { > vpr->addr = addr; > return -EINVAL; > } > return 0; > } My point about passing "addr" was that nothing in the callback actually needs it -- the top level can just as easily report the error. And that the helper is always vpr_fn(), so it doesn't need to be passed either. So the addr can just be encoded in "int", and no structure is needed at: typedef bool (*vpr_fn_t)(pte_t pte); static int vpr_fn(pte_t *pte, unsigned long addr, void *data) { vpr_fn_t callback = data; if (!callback(*pte)) return addr >> PAGE_SIZE; return 0; } unsigned long verify_page_range(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, unsigned long size, vpr_fn_t callback) { return apply_to_page_range(mm, addr, size, vpr_fn, callback) << PAGE_SIZE; } But maybe I'm missing something? -- Kees Cook