Re: [PATCH RFC v2 3/4] mm/mempolicy: fix the check of nodemask from user
From: Vlastimil Babka <hidden>
Date: 2017-10-31 11:28:48
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
On 10/31/2017 12:01 PM, Yisheng Xie wrote:
On 2017/10/31 17:30, Vlastimil Babka wrote:quoted
On 10/27/2017 12:14 PM, Yisheng Xie wrote:quoted
+ /* + * When the user specified more nodes than supported just check + * if the non supported part is all zero. + * + * If maxnode have more longs than MAX_NUMNODES, check + * the bits in that area first. And then go through to + * check the rest bits which equal or bigger than MAX_NUMNODES. + * Otherwise, just check bits [MAX_NUMNODES, maxnode). + */ if (nlongs > BITS_TO_LONGS(MAX_NUMNODES)) { for (k = BITS_TO_LONGS(MAX_NUMNODES); k < nlongs; k++) { - unsigned long t; if (get_user(t, nmask + k)) return -EFAULT; if (k == nlongs - 1) {@@ -1294,6 +1301,16 @@ static int get_nodes(nodemask_t *nodes, const unsigned long __user *nmask, endmask = ~0UL; } + if (maxnode > MAX_NUMNODES && MAX_NUMNODES % BITS_PER_LONG != 0) { + unsigned long valid_mask = endmask; + + valid_mask &= ~((1UL << (MAX_NUMNODES % BITS_PER_LONG)) - 1);I'm not sure if the combination with endmask works in this case: 0 BITS_PER_LONG 2xBITS_PER_LONG |____________|____________| | | MAX_NUMNODES maxnode endmask will contain bits between 0 and maxnodeIn the case, BITS_TO_LONGS(maxnode) > BITS_TO_LONGS(MAX_NUMNODES), right? And after checking BITS_PER_LONG to 2xBITS_PER_LONG,endmask will set to "~0UL". e.g. endmask will be 0xffff ffff ffff ffff if unsigned long is 64bit. Then the valid_mask will just contain bits MAX_NUMNODES to BITS_PER_LONG.
Ugh, right. I missed that. This code is not simple...
Thanks Yisheng Xiequoted
but here we want to check bits between MAX_NUMNODES and BITS_PER_LONG and endmask should not be mixed up with that? Vlastimil-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html