linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-api@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk
Cc: linux@armlinux.org.uk, will@kernel.org, guoren@kernel.org,
	bcain@codeaurora.org, geert@linux-m68k.org, monstr@monstr.eu,
	tsbogend@alpha.franken.de, nickhu@andestech.com,
	green.hu@gmail.com, dinguyen@kernel.org, shorne@gmail.com,
	deller@gmx.de, mpe@ellerman.id.au, peterz@infradead.org,
	mingo@redhat.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, hca@linux.ibm.com,
	dalias@libc.org, davem@davemloft.net, richard@nod.at,
	x86@kernel.org, jcmvbkbc@gmail.com, ebiederm@xmission.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, ardb@kernel.org,
	linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-csky@vger.kernel.org, linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org,
	linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, openrisc@lists.librecores.org,
	linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-um@lists.infradead.org, linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 06/18] x86: use more conventional access_ok() definition
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 14:13:20 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220216131332.1489939-7-arnd@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220216131332.1489939-1-arnd@kernel.org>

From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

The way that access_ok() is defined on x86 is slightly different from
most other architectures, and a bit more complex.

The generic version tends to result in the best output on all
architectures, as it results in single comparison against a constant
limit for calls with a known size.

There are a few callers of __range_not_ok(), all of which use TASK_SIZE
as the limit rather than TASK_SIZE_MAX, but I could not see any reason
for picking this. Changing these to call __access_ok() instead uses the
default limit, but keeps the behavior otherwise.

x86 is the only architecture with a WARN_ON_IN_IRQ() checking
access_ok(), but it's probably best to leave that in place.

Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
---
 arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h | 25 +++----------------------
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
index 79c4869ccdd6..a59ba2578e64 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
@@ -16,33 +16,14 @@
  * Test whether a block of memory is a valid user space address.
  * Returns 0 if the range is valid, nonzero otherwise.
  */
-static inline bool __chk_range_not_ok(unsigned long addr, unsigned long size)
+static inline bool __access_ok(void __user *ptr, unsigned long size)
 {
 	unsigned long limit = TASK_SIZE_MAX;
+	unsigned long addr = ptr;
 
-	/*
-	 * If we have used "sizeof()" for the size,
-	 * we know it won't overflow the limit (but
-	 * it might overflow the 'addr', so it's
-	 * important to subtract the size from the
-	 * limit, not add it to the address).
-	 */
-	if (__builtin_constant_p(size))
-		return unlikely(addr > limit - size);
-
-	/* Arbitrary sizes? Be careful about overflow */
-	addr += size;
-	if (unlikely(addr < size))
-		return true;
-	return unlikely(addr > limit);
+	return (size <= limit) && (addr <= (limit - size));
 }
 
-#define __access_ok(addr, size)						\
-({									\
-	__chk_user_ptr(addr);						\
-	!__chk_range_not_ok((unsigned long __force)(addr), size);	\
-})
-
 #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP
 static inline bool pagefault_disabled(void);
 # define WARN_ON_IN_IRQ()	\
-- 
2.29.2


  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-02-16 13:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 76+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-02-16 13:13 [PATCH v2 00/18] clean up asm/uaccess.h, kill set_fs for good Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-16 13:13 ` [PATCH v2 01/18] uaccess: fix integer overflow on access_ok() Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-16 13:13 ` [PATCH v2 02/18] uaccess: fix nios2 and microblaze get_user_8() Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-16 13:35   ` David Laight
2022-02-18  6:25   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-02-25  4:28   ` Dinh Nguyen
2022-02-16 13:13 ` [PATCH v2 03/18] nds32: fix access_ok() checks in get/put_user Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-18  6:25   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-02-16 13:13 ` [PATCH v2 04/18] sparc64: add __{get,put}_kernel_nocheck() Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-16 13:13 ` [PATCH v2 05/18] x86: remove __range_not_ok() Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-18  6:28   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-02-18  7:29     ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-18 15:45     ` David Laight
2022-02-16 13:13 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2022-02-18  6:29   ` [PATCH v2 06/18] x86: use more conventional access_ok() definition Christoph Hellwig
2022-02-16 13:13 ` [PATCH v2 07/18] nios2: drop access_ok() check from __put_user() Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-18  6:29   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-02-23 23:30   ` Dinh Nguyen
2022-02-24  7:05     ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-16 13:13 ` [PATCH v2 08/18] uaccess: add generic __{get,put}_kernel_nofault Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-18  6:30   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-02-18  8:55   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2022-02-16 13:13 ` [PATCH v2 09/18] mips: use simpler access_ok() Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-21 13:24   ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2022-02-21 14:31     ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-21 15:21       ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2022-02-22 16:36       ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2022-02-23 20:05     ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-23  7:41   ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2022-02-23  9:26     ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-16 13:13 ` [PATCH v2 10/18] m68k: fix access_ok for coldfire Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-18  6:30   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-02-18  9:00   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2022-02-18  9:24     ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-16 13:13 ` [PATCH v2 11/18] arm64: simplify access_ok() Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-16 13:13 ` [PATCH v2 12/18] uaccess: fix type mismatch warnings from access_ok() Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-18  6:31   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-02-25  4:30   ` Dinh Nguyen
2022-02-16 13:13 ` [PATCH v2 13/18] uaccess: generalize access_ok() Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-17  7:52   ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-17 19:15   ` Andy Lutomirski
2022-02-18  7:16     ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-18  9:30     ` David Laight
2022-02-18 18:07       ` Andy Lutomirski
2022-02-18  6:34   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-02-18  7:23     ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-18  9:04   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2022-02-24  8:29   ` Stafford Horne
2022-02-24  8:41     ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-25  4:31   ` Dinh Nguyen
2022-02-16 13:13 ` [PATCH v2 14/18] lib/test_lockup: fix kernel pointer check for separate address spaces Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-18  6:35   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-02-18  7:15     ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-16 13:13 ` [PATCH v2 15/18] sparc64: remove CONFIG_SET_FS support Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-16 18:34   ` Sam Ravnborg
2022-02-16 18:41     ` Sam Ravnborg
2022-02-16 22:01       ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-16 13:13 ` [PATCH v2 16/18] sh: " Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-18  6:36   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-02-16 13:13 ` [PATCH v2 17/18] ia64: " Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-16 13:13 ` [PATCH v2 18/18] uaccess: drop maining CONFIG_SET_FS users Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-16 18:44   ` Sam Ravnborg
2022-02-16 22:02     ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-17 22:36   ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-18  6:37   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-02-18  7:10     ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-18 10:18   ` Sergey Matyukevich
2022-02-24  8:45   ` Stafford Horne
2022-02-25  4:33   ` Dinh Nguyen
2022-02-17  7:20 ` [PATCH v2 00/18] clean up asm/uaccess.h, kill set_fs for good Christophe Leroy
2022-02-17  7:49   ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-18  2:21     ` Al Viro
2022-02-18  9:20       ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-18  1:50   ` Al Viro
2022-02-18 10:01     ` Christophe Leroy
2022-02-17  8:13 ` Arnd Bergmann

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=20220216131332.1489939-7-arnd@kernel.org \
    --to=arnd@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=bcain@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=dalias@libc.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=deller@gmx.de \
    --cc=dinguyen@kernel.org \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=green.hu@gmail.com \
    --cc=guoren@kernel.org \
    --cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=jcmvbkbc@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-csky@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-um@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=monstr@monstr.eu \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=nickhu@andestech.com \
    --cc=openrisc@lists.librecores.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=richard@nod.at \
    --cc=shorne@gmail.com \
    --cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=tsbogend@alpha.franken.de \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /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).