From: christophe leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/7] uaccess: Tell user_access_begin() if it's for a write or not
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 20:47:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fc5c94a2-5a25-0715-5240-5ba3cbe0f2b2@c-s.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wg4HEABOZdjxMzbembNmxs1zYfrNAEc2L+JS9FBSnM8JA@mail.gmail.com>
Le 23/01/2020 à 19:02, Linus Torvalds a écrit :
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 4:59 AM Christophe Leroy
> <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> wrote:
>>
>> On 32 bits powerPC (book3s/32), only write accesses to user are
>> protected and there is no point spending time on unlocking for reads.
>
> Honestly, I'm starting to think that 32-bit ppc just needs to look
> more like everybody else, than make these changes.
Well, beside ppc32, I was also seen it as an opportunity for the modern
ppc64. On it, you can unlock either read or write or both. And this is
what is done for get_user() / put_user() and friends: unlock only reads
for get_user() and only writes for put_user().
Could also be a compromise between performance and security: keeping
reads allowed at all time and only protect against writes on modern
architectures which support it like ppc64.
>
> We used to have a read/write argument to the old "verify_area()" and
> "access_ok()" model, and it was a mistake. It was due to odd i386 user
> access issues. We got rid of it. I'm not convinced this is any better
> - it looks very similar and for odd ppc access issues.
I'm going to leave it aside, at least for the time being, and do it as a
second step later after evaluating the real performance impact. I'll
respin tomorrow in that way.
>
> But if we really do want to do this, then:
Indeed I took the idea from a discussion in last Octobre (Subject:
"book3s/32 KUAP (was Re: [PATCH] Convert filldir[64]() from __put_user()
to unsafe_put_user())" )
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/87h84avffi.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au/
>
>> Add an argument to user_access_begin() to tell when it's for write and
>> return an opaque key that will be used by user_access_end() to know
>> what was done by user_access_begin().
>
> You should make it more opaque than "unsigned long".
>
> Also, it shouldn't be a "is this a write". What if it's a read _and_ a
> write? Only a write? Only a read?
Indeed that was more: does it includes a write. It's either RO or RW
Christophe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-23 19:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-23 12:59 [PATCH v3 1/7] fs/readdir: Fix filldir() and filldir64() use of user_access_begin() Christophe Leroy
2020-01-23 12:59 ` [PATCH v3 2/7] uaccess: Tell user_access_begin() if it's for a write or not Christophe Leroy
2020-01-23 13:11 ` Jani Nikula
2020-01-23 18:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-01-23 19:47 ` christophe leroy [this message]
2020-01-23 19:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-01-24 2:03 ` hpa
2020-01-25 6:17 ` Tony Luck
2020-01-25 14:40 ` kbuild test robot
2020-01-23 12:59 ` [PATCH v3 3/7] powerpc/32s: Fix bad_kuap_fault() Christophe Leroy
2020-01-23 12:59 ` [PATCH v3 4/7] powerpc/kuap: Fix set direction in allow/prevent_user_access() Christophe Leroy
2020-01-23 12:59 ` [PATCH v3 5/7] powerpc/32s: Drop NULL addr verification Christophe Leroy
2020-01-23 12:59 ` [PATCH v3 6/7] powerpc/32s: Prepare allow_user_access() for user_access_begin() Christophe Leroy
2020-01-23 12:59 ` [PATCH v3 7/7] powerpc: Implement user_access_begin and friends Christophe Leroy
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=fc5c94a2-5a25-0715-5240-5ba3cbe0f2b2@c-s.fr \
--to=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--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).