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=-15.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable 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 4872FC49361 for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 16:56:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34109610A2 for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 16:56:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231203AbhFQQ6i (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2021 12:58:38 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:41126 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229891AbhFQQ6h (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2021 12:58:37 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x434.google.com (mail-pf1-x434.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::434]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE1E6C06175F for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 09:56:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x434.google.com with SMTP id x16so5466660pfa.13 for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 09:56:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=L9IcSvAICD+U/kKt7IUlwx608cX5lF0CPn5R5C+3NW8=; b=XFzdglhhecZ/H2drQOlCjTs6C+ItAlaL2CsVQqHdgUVGZzeA0s+zS5r9gMjj3gS8m8 1YYYW6mG8Vb8pvyUUCoqZLicJwA1VTFgbXP7An/XJfvQW+LZx2/BjZ9gaJNG8zOx13C4 /GpgT+iXS6Zu/mKy6D4o6SbcYavhYuizV8IEMUrupNMjN7e61NfFjB5oda3eHrmTzSLc u8L0veCkpE2b+dk4Fu4AIyh69ZdxSxlS0IPKkyIaBPSO3+JWzGpZOU/TE+NPmdMZlzN3 tMANSUo9w1KrAnqO2zP813Sd2gujuFCMdCrdn6cou+jtaonh/vZ2SraA85MN7WpBuC7c RT4A== 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=L9IcSvAICD+U/kKt7IUlwx608cX5lF0CPn5R5C+3NW8=; b=k0gi+IMQI3cpBR42INiAilhfN3/7MrwmFxH9Tzxpf713fpJ38BxtaoTw0++XHqt9Uh 9cK5ah4ho17wPt9E+mcGnCedI7TdNQUGACvkBbmtO3E7n6uPte5uFpNS5iRcgpA3/Lfl HgPWzCOejyYcASy6bJhQb1FFw2HEVuMdmTJXhGrHcXAdKWjpavT8EaCfzK9E005r26tv 9FhWcRznIjEyuWaQHUqikDELWr9qMMYtbp4YN67g17ITGB4Jr4HE4EeyOtWE0wirkvnE BjrR9jOsfu3ekOtiilEWX31KCKDAWnxPELAoi6Npam2R5YhCXx96oGgx2s7/1MeX7MTd EpCg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531YTs5T3ChO3aYE0Icvbh8E3xIt+CXDVsHVizeysqH2XCbQV/iy m9jxI6utLHx2jKrhJr72W+YfCA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz5PIJdGN/kVGKWKgGFc/IPVGn6kFv5v+i5czhgvDsG9p3htJ0Gzhm2i2EZO34T5kE2xDMgzg== X-Received: by 2002:a63:fd17:: with SMTP id d23mr5964877pgh.68.1623948988127; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 09:56:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p14s (S0106889e681aac74.cg.shawcable.net. [68.147.0.187]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g8sm6690411pgo.10.2021.06.17.09.56.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 17 Jun 2021 09:56:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 10:56:24 -0600 From: Mathieu Poirier To: Arnaud POULIQUEN Cc: Bjorn Andersson , Ohad Ben-Cohen , 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 Message-ID: <20210617165624.GB782884@p14s> References: <20210604091406.15901-1-arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com> <20210604091406.15901-4-arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com> <20210615174634.GB604521@p14s> <20210616171524.GA637642@p14s> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 10:02:14AM +0200, Arnaud POULIQUEN wrote: > 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 > >>>> --- > >>>> 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. > You are correct - I overlooked the RO attribute in the rpmsg_show_attr() macro. > 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. I think we should protect both of them or neither of them. I'd be fine with either solution. > > 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 > >>>>