Thread (67 messages) 67 messages, 11 authors, 2020-09-23

Re: [PATCH 1/9] kernel: add a PF_FORCE_COMPAT flag

From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Date: 2020-09-19 22:41:33
Also in: io-uring, keyrings, linux-arm-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mips, linux-mm, linux-s390, linux-scsi, linux-security-module, linuxppc-dev, lkml, netdev, sparclinux

On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 03:23:54PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
quoted
On Sep 19, 2020, at 3:09 PM, Al Viro [off-list ref] wrote:

On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 05:16:15PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
quoted
quoted
On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 02:58:22PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
Said that, why not provide a variant that would take an explicit
"is it compat" argument and use it there?  And have the normal
one pass in_compat_syscall() to that...
That would help to not introduce a regression with this series yes.
But it wouldn't fix existing bugs when io_uring is used to access
read or write methods that use in_compat_syscall().  One example that
I recently ran into is drivers/scsi/sg.c.
So screw such read/write methods - don't use them with io_uring.
That, BTW, is one of the reasons I'm sceptical about burying the
decisions deep into the callchain - we don't _want_ different
data layouts on read/write depending upon the 32bit vs. 64bit
caller, let alone the pointer-chasing garbage that is /dev/sg.
Well, we could remove in_compat_syscall(), etc and instead have an implicit parameter in DEFINE_SYSCALL.  Then everything would have to be explicit.  This would probably be a win, although it could be quite a bit of work.
It would not be a win - most of the syscalls don't give a damn
about 32bit vs. 64bit...
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help